Yeah, this is controversial and all that. So apparently the lead researcher on Gardasil (the HPV vaccine) said, “the controversial drugs will do little to reduce cervical cancer rates and, even though they’re being recommended for girls as young as nine, there have been no efficacy trials in children under the age of 15.”

Oh my. Link: http://thebulletin.us/articles/2009/10/25/top_stories/doc4ae4b76d07e16766677720.txt

There is a rebuttal here: http://skeptvet.com/Blog/2009/10/anti-vaccine-activists-and-conservative-christians-vs-hpv-vaccination/

Most of the rebuttal consists of, “But a lot of the people in the article are anti-vaccine so their opinion doesn’t count” to which I provide: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uu5voTjCr_c

You know, I am not completely anti-vaccine. I’m really not. I get a number of boosters and I have (selectively) vaccinated my daughter. Just because you disagree with a side of an argument doesn’t mean they are completely wrong.

Ok, my problem with the rebuttal: at this point it seems to me that folks on the pro-vaccine argument have decided that if anyone is on the anti-vaccine side of the argument that their argument can never have merit regardless of what is actually being presented. That kind of black and white thinking is not particularly helpful.