How Best to Prevent Cancer

HPV Case Study The author of this report has been asked to assess and reflect upon a public health dilemma. In particular, the issue is whether HPV vaccination should be mandated or at least widely encouraged on a wide-spread or targeted basis. Unlike other vaccines such as those for polio, the measles, mumps, rubella and pneumonia, HPV cannot be contracted through casual contact. Indeed, sexual contact is really the only way to get it. At the same time, not being protected against HPV can cause cervical cancer in women.

While there are certainly detractors when it comes to vaccines, the efficacy and importance of those vaccines cannot be understated or under sold. The main dilemma cited is that HPV is not transmittable through anything other than sexual contact. While this may lessen the chances of it being passed from person to person, most everyone will engage in sexual contact at some point in their lives and HPV is one of those diseases that can lead to cancer.

As such, vaccination can easily be justified given that the risks of the vaccine causing problems is low and the consequences of not being protected is high. A good middle ground, however, is that people that wish to not get the vaccine on moral or other grounds (e.g. concerns about vaccine safety, etc.) can opt out .. but they must do so via a signature that the parent has been advised of the risks of not getting the vaccine.

Indeed, people that are very careful about their sexual habits and partners will probably be safe but people lie about such things all the time and the risks of chancing the honesty and habits of others is almost certainly a lot more problematic that trusting others when it comes to their sexual behavior and proclivities. Given the amount of unwed births and spread of other sexually transmitted diseases, the risk is not nearly as low as some would suggest (Bohlin, 2016; Weissman, 2014).

The author of this report asserts the above based on the fact that preventing a problem before it starts is a lot easier than doing so after it has arrived. Preventing diseases in advance leads to better health outcomes, lower medical costs and less worry.

For example, if there was a vaccine or other treatment that prevented type II diabetes from developing in people if they got obese or otherwise unhealthy, it would be a no-brainer to mass-produce and mass-use that vaccine due to the fact that it would lower health costs substantially and improve healthcare outcomes for people that would otherwise develop renal failure, limbs that have to be amputated and so forth. Battling the misinformation and alarmism can be hard but the net benefit could not be denied (CDC, 2016).

The actions above are absolutely in line with the ethical principles of the author so long as the HPV vaccine is mandated across the board. Targeting specific groups alone is not the best way due to the potential stigmatizing mentioned in the case and there would be plenty of non-targeted people that would be missed. Anyone susceptible to the disease should be required to get vaccinated unless they sign off on the potential risks. Informed consent (or lack thereof) is better than leaving things to chance.

Things would be different if one was talking about vaccines for diseases like Ebola or Dengue Fever. Those diseases are only highly present in certain parts of the world and thus only people that travel to those places (e.g. West Africa) need to worry about it (Thornicroft, Brohan, Kassam & Lewis-Holmes, 2008). Conclusion When it comes to diseases that can easily be transmitted, even if it requires sexual behavior, mandating of vaccination should be a normal course of action unless the risks are high.

For example, if there were vaccines for HIV / AIDS or herpes (neither one of which are curable at this point) and the vaccine is safe, that would be.