Dalton 1

1

Madeleine Dalton
Professor Olsen
Biology 1090
July 6, 2014
Taking Sides #2
Issue Number: 2
Title of Issue: Should Vaccination for HPV Be Mandated for Teenage Girls?
1. The author for the Yes side is Joseph E. Balog. He believes in a more Utilitarian
perspective, and thinks it will be best for everyone if the vaccine is mandatory. He comes
to the conclusion that a mandatory vaccine for young girls will be justified considering
the developing health concerns around the world.
2. The authors of the No side are Gail Javitt, Deena Berkowitz, and Lawrence O. Gostin.
They believe that since there is little data and information about the HPV vaccine, it is
unnecessary to force young girls to have it; its expensive, and HPV doesnt pose
imminent and significant risk to others.
3. The first fact presented by Baogs side is the observation that 46% of high school
students have sexual intercourse. The second, 3.2 million teens have sexually transmitted
infections and 18.3% of them have HPV. The first fact presented by Javitt, Berkowitz,
and Gostin is that only 45% of the people who answered in a poll about the vaccine
agreed that it should be included in mandatory vaccinations. The second fact; in the
Dalton 2

2

Gardasil clinical trials, the follow-up period was fifteen months after the third dose of the
vaccine.
4. The first opinion from Balog is that a mandatory vaccination will have the best results for
the population; it will be the greatest good for the most amount of people. The second
opinion made is that it isnt harmful or wrong to implement the mandatory vaccine. The
first opinion made by the No side is that the proposed policy would be morally, and
ethically wrong; not to mention premature. The second opinion is that the vaccine is
new, and the safety of it is unknown.
5. The fallacy I noticed in the Yes article is when Balog says that abstinence programs and
other alternatives to safe sex like parental communication, arent working. Theres no
way to actually determine something like that.
6. The only lack of reasoning I noticed on the No side is where the article says that HPV
infection presents no public health necessity. Of course it is a health concern; its known
to cause cancer if untreated.
7. Joseph Balog impressed me the most in presenting his thesis on the HPV vaccination
issue. He brought up a lot of good points and facts that just made more sense to me, and
further persuaded me to agree with his argument. Its interesting that he brought up Polio,
and used its history to his advantage. He also spoke of Stuart Mill, a Utilitarian, and I
personally believe that it is completely ethical and moral to mandate an HPV vaccine that
will, in turn, be beneficial to many people.
8. I have no reason to believe any of the authors are biased. Though they come from
different career fields, that doesnt mean their opinions or information is biased. Its very
interesting though that Deena Berkowitz is a physician and is part of the No side. There
Dalton 3

3

could be potential bias there, but Im confident that none of the authors work for the HPV
vaccination company.
9. After reviewing both articles, I personally feel the Yes side is most correct. Since I have
already had the Gardasil vaccine, I believe it would be in the best interest of young girls.
If there was a way to make it more cost effective, I think it would help a lot of people in
the long run. Considering how many young teens are sexually active, I think its our
responsibility to ensure that they are safe, informed, and disease-free for as long as
possible. Its always best to be safe, and HPV is one less thing I need to worry about.