Whenever I wish to talk about politics, there is one person I turn to frequently. In conversations with my good friend Shawn McElhinney, the subject of Michele Bachmann frequently comes up. Both of us have always been in agreement that she would never be the nominee. I believe she may have won the straw poll, but her political corpse will lay there. Yet out of the interest of encouraging a wider debate, I advocated keeping her in the field, as I believed (at the time) she served a useful purpose and spoke to a constituency that, while I do not identify with them, they have a place in the Republican Party.
It has become harder and harder to maintain this position, especially in light of the past week's events. First, let us do a recap.
In 2007, Texas Governor Rick Perry decided to issue an executive order, mandating the use of Gardasil amongst girls as young as 12 years old. Gardasil is a vaccination against HPV. An HPV infection can lead to cervical cancer, something which is very serious for women. At the time, not much was known about Gardasil, and the idea of using an executive order to mandate an injection against a sexually transmitted disease was controversial. Realizing a losing battle when he sees one, Perry withdrew the order, and went back to making Texas an absolute monster when it comes to job creation. When his GOP primary challenger in 2009 tried to make this an issue, Perry apologized for the EO, and then went on to absolutely crush the Bush machine's hired gun to take him down. (Precisely because the likes of Karl Rove saw in their intra-party rival a future presidential candidate.)
During the GOP primary debates for the Presidency, now presidential candidate Rick Perry has had the same line of attack come up again. For the most part, this is a fair line of attack. Even if I dismiss the idea that Perry was bribed by big Pharma to do this, when companies like Merck (the maker of the drug) donate to you (even if it is just 5,000 out of tens of millions of dollars raised), you have to answer those questions. Mrs. Bachmann took this entirely legitimate line of attack and did what too many Tea Partiers (and social conservatives) do with a legitimate issue: demagogue it so hard you end up saying something colossally stupid.
Bachmann turned the issue into a full fledged crusade against vaccines in general. She then made a whopper of a claim that the HPV vaccine Governor Perry wished to mandate caused mental retardation in innocent 12 year old girl taken to the CIA black site and injected with the latest biological weapon called Gardasil, or something. Failing that, she then turned to stating the drug was unsafe, making it sound like after the CIA injected you with the latest doomsday device, people were dropping dead left and right.
There is absolutely no evidence for this. Bachmann didn't care. She saw a chance to smear an opponent, and took it. In FDA studies, they have records of Gardasil being administered 35,000,000 times. Out of those incidents, there were 1500 incidents that were deemed worthy of further investigation. No conclusive evidence after rigorous testing was found that Gardasil caused these incidents. Out of those 35 million injections, 68 deaths resulted. That's essentially statistical noise, and the FDA confirmed that. Not one of those deaths was related to Gardasil. They concluded that the relevance of them being injected with Gardasil is as relevant as sweaters causing deaths because people die when wearing sweaters. (Source)
Needless to say, the evidence is beyond non-existent for mental retardation as a result of the drug. Mrs. Bachmann claims she heard it from someone during a campaign stop. I'm going to go out on a limb: there was no person she heard this from. She relied on junk science and flat out made it up. (The junk science being a thoroughly discredited study which claimed certain injections led to an increase in autism amongst children.)
The other concerns about the HPV vaccine (outside of the mandate) do have some weight, but I think ultimately fall up short. One of the most popular concerns is that providing the vaccination encourages risky sexual behavior and experimentation amongst minors.
This sounds plausible.... in theory. Cervical cancer tends to develop amongst those who are past their teenage years. If we want to believe that teenagers are considering cancer decades later as a reason to keep their clothes on before engaging in carnal acts, sorry, that's an adult talking. The flipside of this argument is that we need to keep the threat of cancer around to punish those who engage in risky behavior. I know that's not what people mean, but care to offer an alternative that precludes it?
This is different than funding contraception, abortion, and the like. These activities do encourage risky behavior. Why? Contracting something like HIV or causing a pregnancy is a rather visible side-effect of the sexual act in the immediate sense. At most, you've got 3 months before your deed becomes known, and consequences start. The incentive against sex isn't an intellectual one here, it's entirely emotional, because it is so darn visible and apparent. Subsidizing the elimination of these barriers will lead to more people engaging in the act. In short, Gardasil could encourage risky behavior, but the evidence is extremely thin when one remembers the circumstances surrounding adolescence and the pressures of sex they face.
Megan McArdle brings up several salient points. First and foremost, half of sexually active individuals, at one point in their life, are infected with HPV. The majority of the time the infection is harmless and does nothing. Yet all to often, something else occurs. With such a high occurrence, this can't be dismissed lightly. Can you guarantee, as a celibate to the night of your wedding, that your spouse has done the same? What if they had a moment of weakness? What if they amended their life and started living chastely?
Knowing these things, the issue of Gardasil isn't as cut and dry as those in Bachmann's camp wish to make it. This long ago stopped being whether or not one should use EO's to carry out these things (a perfectly legitimate point, and something I agree with Perry's critics on), it has become a crusade against the facts. Bachmann deserves the strongest of condemnation, and if she is written out of the Presidential race tomorrow, it will be too long. We need to get back to real issues. Make Governor Perry reconcile the mandate for Gardasil with his profession of belief in limited government, and if he would want such a mandate nationally.
The only thing left to wonder is if Minnesota has finished their redistricting, and if not, how can we redistrict Bachmann out of existence, so she no longer plagues the nation with her stupidity? If a President Perry were a vengeful fellow, I would not doubt if he behind the scenes engineered a primary challenge, or tried to get her out of Congress. I really don't think anybody could fault him for such an act. Perhaps a President Romney should do so as well, if only to save himself from when she eventually implodes and damages his credibility.
No comments:
Post a Comment