Immunizations for Teens
Advice, discussions, and reviews from the
Parents of Teens weekly email newsletter.
Berkeley Parents Network >
Advice >
Teens, Preteens, & Young Adults >
Immunizations for Teens
April 2008
My 17 year old daughter has never been immunized and will
going to college in the fall. I'm wary of immunizations but
her doctor is recommending them and my daughter is saying
that she wants them.
Does anybody have experience with first time immunizations
for a teenager? I'm wondering about partial immunization,
but don't know which ones are most relevant in general and
at her age? Also her doctor was talking about bundling them
(having her do them all at once) and I'm wondering about
the pros and cons of doing them all together or spreading
them out? And I know that there are version of some
vaccines that don't have heavy metals mixed into them but I
don't know where to get them...?
Anon
Our kids have been partially vaccinated, so it is possible
to get some of the vaccines and not others. We chose to
get one vaccine at a time (although we did get the DTaP
and the MMR, which are vaccines grouped together), so we
did not do DTaP, MMR and Polio together like many people
do. We felt this was a healthier way for our kids. There
is one vaccine that is supposed to be good for college age
kids, and I want to say it is menningitis, but I don't
know for sure, but apparently the disease can be deadly
and the vaccine is, I believe, effective. I am sure you
will get other interesting responses to your question.
anon
regarding bundling of immunizations, i would recommend
against it. if you can spread these out over several
months to a year it would be so much better. it is alot to
ask of the immune system to adapt to all at once. you can
only fight so many battles at a time!
kate
May 2008
I was wondering how other parents are handling the
pressure to get their daughter the Gardisal (HPV)
vaccinations? I have decided to have my daughter do it
later in high school before she goes to college. However
there is all this pressure to have it done before the
girls turn 13. I know my daughter (yes, I know we all say
that), and she really is not into boys and is not at risk
at starting to be sexually active in the next few years. I
know that this can change when she goes to college. She is
going through a sensitive time with all the hormones and
puberty stuff, a shot and the reasons for it could really
mess her up right now. She didn't even want to have her
ears pierced when she hit 12, the age we agreed she could
do it. Is there any other reason, immunological/physiology
wise, so make sure they get this between 11-13? Or do
the ''experts'' just figure that parents have more control
to make sure it happens at this age?
Jeanne
It's wonderful that you're being so thoughtful about this
and that you are planning to get your daughter the HPV
vaccine during her teen years. I think the impetus to do it
in middle school is just to make sure the entire series is
done well before these girls do become sexually active. I
know you think your daughter isn't going to become sexually
active until she goes to college - and perhaps that will be
the case. But the statistics say that's not a safe gamble.
According to the California Healthy Kids Survey, 23 percent
of the state's high school freshmen and 38 percent of the
juniors are sexually active. (And not to alarm you or
anything, but ditto for 13 percent of the seventh graders.)
Age 11 may be a tad early for your family, but I'd urge you
to get it done before high school. Why take the chance?
Jackie
When I went with my 13 year old daughter for a general
checkup with her longtime pediatrician, the MD assumed she
would be getting an HPV vaccine and I said no. There may or
may not be a benefit to the general population of all teens
for young teens to receive this vaccine on top of all their
regular childhood vaccines, which I do support and have
given to my children. But specifically for my daughter at
this time, I see no reason for her to get this relatively
new and very aggressively promoted (by its drug company
developer) treatment when I'm quite sure she is currently at
no risk. After a few years, we'll reconsider when there has
been more time to see if the vaccine has any side effects,
how effective it is at the explicit claims and implicit
expectations re reducing cancer in a larger population than
the experimental trial participants, when my daughter is
more likely to be at even a small risk of HPV, and when
there is serious discussion about vaccinating the males and
not just the females.
Mom with public health degree
My daughter had them at age 16 as they weren't offering it earlier, so really I
don't think it makes a difference. But that said you may not know when she
has sex and for her to be protected in all ways is the best. It happened all of
a sudden with my daughter: becoming more interested in boys, getting her
ears pierced, so I was glad that we had talked about using condoms, etc.
early on. (There were times that she really didn't want to listen to what I had
to say, but I think it sank in anyway.) I would rather be safe than sorry when
it comes to uterine cancer. The vaccine takes a few months to complete as
there are three shots to distribute over those months. Of course getting this
vaccine could also be a big ploy by the big drug companies...
anon
From a doctor friend of the family (infectious disease
specialty):
There are three main reasons for doing it in that age group:
1) The vaccine is most effective in PREVENTING infection
rather than having any effect on already established HPV
infection. Thus, recommendations are to give the vaccine
BEFORE girls become sexually active. The series takes
several months to complete, so it's better to start early to
make sure girls are covered before they initiate sexual
activity. I know every parent thinks they know their kids,
but you'd be surprised what the kids get up to without the
parents knowing...
2) Parents do tend to have more input on when/if their kids
go to the doctor's at this age. These years are often those
of sports physicals or pre-camp physicals and it's a good
opportunity to give vaccines. Older teens and adults are
TERRIBLE about seeing the doctor on their own for
preventative health care, including vaccines. (how many
adults do you know who have their tetanus shots (Tdap which
now includes pertussis) up-to-date?)
3) Studies were done in girls this age, so recommendations
were made for administration during these years.
Also, parents may consider discussing this with their
children as a means of preventing cervical cancer rather
than preventing an STD. Ultimately that is the purpose of
the vaccine but I think the ''sexually transmitted disease''
part of it gets the majority of the press and layperson
attention rather than the truly amazing potential to prevent
an extremely serious cancer with a simple series of three shots.
I understand your concern. As an RN, I came to understand
that although healthcare professionals push the
administration of this vaccine to early adolescents, it
will remain effective during their adult years. This
means, even if they remain pure until marraige, the
vaccine will not be a waist. I understand the
contraversy. That's why I decided not to go into too much
detail with my 12-year old daughter when she got it. I
simply explained that the vaccine was meant to help reduce
the risk for cervical cancer. She was OK with that
explaination and did not probe further.
Marilynn
There is much evidence to show that Gardasil poses a serious
risk to the health of the very girls that Merck's marketing
targets. See reports of adverse effects at Judicial Watch:
(www.judicialwatch.org/6428.shtml), ''As of May 11, 2007, the
1,637 adverse vaccination reactions reported to the FDA via
the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) included
371 serious reactions.''
Furthermore, there is no evidence that HPV 'causes' cervical
cancer. In fact, cervical cancer accounts for only about 1%
of all cancer deaths in women, and routing pap screening is
time-tested and safe.
There is plenty of information available online. The
National Vaccine Information Center is one good place to
start: www.909shot.com
See also Alliance for Human Research Protection:
www.ahrp.org/cms/content/view/263/28/
Just Saying NO to Big Pharma
Why vaccinate 13 year olds? The vaccine is more effective if
given before the beginning of sexual activity, and some kids
start quite young. However, I decided I don't want my kids
to get it. I talked to them about the pros and cons of
sexual activity and asked them to use condoms, especially
the first time. Condoms protect against other diseases, too.
I think they are the better choice, along with limiting the
number of partners and regular pap smears. I also asked my
kids to stick with just kissing until they have been dating
the same person for at least six months. But I also tell
them that it is their body and their choice. When it comes
right down to it, it is impossible to control a teenager.
anon
My daughter did the Gardasil series last year during her
senior year of high school. I daresay you'll receive
responses about the wisdom, or lack thereof, of urging her
to get the shots. I urged my daughter to do so because I
contracted HPV from a boyfriend when I was in my '20s, and
then had some peculiar pap smear results when I was 50,
necessitating treatment for a possible pre-cancerous
condition.
I, too, assumed that my daughter would wait for college to
start having sex. She was a ''good girl'': bookish,
opinionated, did her homework, didn't cut class or mess
around with alcohol/drugs; was actually a bit puritanical
in her attitudes. While in middle school, and later, she
assured me--and at the time probably believed it herself--
that she wasn't interested in sex.
Well, she and her first boyfriend were having sex when
they were 16. I wasn't pleased, but I knew they were using
at least two forms of birth control, including condoms,
and learned to live with my knowledge (after a few days of
weeping and mild hysterics). I think that our talks about
sex--emotions, ''mechanics,'' decision making, birth
control, STDs, etc.--helped her decide that (1) she wanted
sex at that particular age and (2) she certainly didn't
want to get pregnant. My daughter, at my suggestion, read
some articles about HPV, the Gardasil vaccine, etc., and
decided to do the series, even though she's kind of needle-
phobic.
So I guess what I want to stress is the importance of
calm, straightforward communication with our sons and
daughters and of not ever assuming too much. They are full
of surprises, pleasant and otherwise.
Anonymous
Our pediatrician has told us to wait a few years to
immunize our 12-year-old. I think this is because more
effective vaccines may be available in a couple of years.
My daughter has begun menstruating, but is a long way from
having a boyfriend. The pediatrician has been wonderful in
many ways, and in general has assumed we would do all the
immunizations which we did except for one that caused a
reaction(pertussis???).
anon
I think that the reason for the Gardisal vaccine is to help prevent cervical
cancer in our daughters. My 15 year old just finished the vaccine series. She
is not sexually active and is no where near making that decision. Yet, the
possibility of protecting her from cervical cancer was not a question in my
mind.
I gather that your young teen had the Hepatitis B vaccines, the ones required
for kids before they enter 7th grade, by state law. Did that vaccine and the
reason for it mess up your daughter?
Truly, I do not know if my 15 year old will have sex before she turns 18. I
hope not. Yet, for me the issue is cancer prevention not sexual activity. I
cannot guarantee that she will not be sexually active before college and that
she will tell me when she makes that decision. I can guarantee that I can get
her vaccinated, with no upset with my daughter, who also does not like
needles. The explanation to my daughter was this vaccine will reduce your
risk of getting cervical cancer. I want you to have this vaccine to help protect
your health now and in the future. Period.
anon
This Gardisal question is a good one. Having a 14 year old girl, I've been
trying to educated myself about this drug. Some facts i've collected: HPV - in
more than 90% of cases the infections are harmless and go away without
treatment. HPV-16 - is found in 50% of cervical cancers. The vast majority of
HPV infections do not progress to cervical cancer. The drug is new (2006) and
was tested on 2,392 women. Of these 859 were excluded because of pre-
infection. (i.e. small study) The vaccine offers no protection against other
types of HPV that can also cause cervical cancer - only HPV-16. In addition
it's unknown whether the vaccine's protection against HPV-16 is long-
lasting. (All this from National Cancer Institute Website) While the study
period was not long enough for cervical cancer to develop, the prevention of
these cervical precancerous lesions is believed highly likely to result in the
prevention of those cancers. - (FDA website) I'm personally wary of Merck's
aggressive campaign to convince states to make it mandatory for girls. They
are making a bundle on this ($300 per injection x 3 doses). I'm wondering if
Gardisil is too new and has yet to be subjected to enough scrutiny. Love to
hear other opinions.
Very Concerned
this page was last updated: Sep 15, 2008
The opinions and statements expressed on this website
are those of parents who subscribe to the
Berkeley Parents Network.
Please see
Disclaimer & Usage for
information about using content on this website.
Copyright © 1996-2013 Berkeley Parents Network