theweaselking: (Default)
[personal profile] theweaselking
Texas mandates cancer vaccine for schoolchildren.

Of course, this being Rick Perry, he did it because his corporate paymasters told him to, but, regardless of the idiocy of both his reasoning and the idea of paying whatever Merck thinks is a good price for an HPV vaccine, it's a good step.

(no subject)

Date: 2007-02-02 10:45 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] unnamed525.livejournal.com
This is just an example of what happens when you have private funding of political campaigns; you can't avoid politicians in corporation's pockets in such a system.

(no subject)

Date: 2007-02-02 11:39 pm (UTC)
jerril: A cartoon head with caucasian skin, brown hair, and glasses. (Default)
From: [personal profile] jerril
Interesting - isn't this the HPV vaccine that the whitehouse was desperately trying to ignore because they figured it would make women promiscuous?

(no subject)

Date: 2007-02-03 12:07 am (UTC)

(no subject)

Date: 2007-02-03 12:32 am (UTC)
ext_8707: Taken in front of Carnegie Hall (solar eclipse)
From: [identity profile] ronebofh.livejournal.com
And the alternative is... funding political campaigns with tax money?

(no subject)

Date: 2007-02-03 04:14 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] toku666.livejournal.com
Texas NAC Vampire Motherfuckers!!!

(no subject)

Date: 2007-02-03 04:23 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] tsunami-ryuu.livejournal.com
Mmm. I'm not thrilled by the idea that they're mandating a vaccine that hasn't been subject to long-term effects studies and that really isn't necessary to stop a transmittable pandemic (HPV ain't the same as, say, measles and ain't caught as easily or in the same manner).

I think the vaccine should be optional and made available to those who want it. I sure as heck wouldn't want the vaccine yet. Just think about the whole Hormone Replacement Therapy fiasco. That's what can happen when people ride the bandwagon of a new drug whose effects haven't been followed for the long term.

(no subject)

Date: 2007-02-03 06:36 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] unnamed525.livejournal.com
Yes. Equal funding.

(no subject)

Date: 2007-02-03 06:40 am (UTC)
ext_8707: Taken in front of Carnegie Hall (peligro! hay cocodrilos!)
From: [identity profile] ronebofh.livejournal.com
Who gets it? Every officially registered candidate? Somehow i doubt the Democrats and the Republicans are going to give equal funding to the little people. It might happen on a local scale, but at the state or federal level? Never.

(no subject)

Date: 2007-02-03 07:03 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] unnamed525.livejournal.com
Further evidence of their corruption and unfitness to rule.

(no subject)

Date: 2007-02-03 07:26 am (UTC)
ext_8707: Taken in front of Carnegie Hall (monterey)
From: [identity profile] ronebofh.livejournal.com
Ah, a revolutionary. I can support that.

(no subject)

Date: 2007-02-05 08:49 pm (UTC)
matgb: Artwork of 19th century upper class anarchist, text: MatGB (Default)
From: [personal profile] matgb
Or, given that most other countries that hold elections have far few problems, you could reform campaign finance, make all donations completely public, mandate candidates can't spend more than a set amount, give free equal access to certain types of advertising and ban paid for campaign slots, etc.

Oh, wait, that would mean learning from other countries and improving on their ideas. Sorry, forgot that that stopped happening aroundabout 1800.

Profile

theweaselking: (Default)theweaselking
Page generated Feb. 6th, 2026 09:23 am