Canada’s World

Merck’s HPV vaccine Gardasil has gained popularity with policy makers, health experts and the general public alike since it’s launch over two years ago. More and more eligible women are getting the prick in Canada, and reservations concerning effectiveness and safety are beginning to diminish as the vaccine experiences some market longevity. But as the vaccine’s popularity increases, concerns over the use and ramifications of mandatory policies and public health recommendations are only beginning to arise.

Both the Centre for Disease Control in the U.S. and the National Advisory Committee on Immunization in Canada have recommended vaccination for girls as young as 9 years old. Provincial health departments along with the national government have provided millions for huge vaccination programs, encouraging all school age girls to undergo the three shot procedure, usually with an out-opt out clause and parental consent required in some cases. Despite the fact that most public health, reproductive rights groups and immunization experts have touted the accessibility of Gardasil, many have also voiced reservations concerning the consequences of health authorities placing so much money, effort and faith into a still new technology. They argue that public health agencies shouldn’t put all of their resources into providing vaccinations, but instead should continue to focus on the overall reproductive health of young women, primarily through condom promotion, comprehensive sexual education, and pap smears. Some critics have even gone so far as to contribute the fast movement up the policy scale of Gardasil to heavy campaigning by Merck and it’s supportive non-governmental organizations. Rather than seeing things objectively, they argue, health researchers and policy makers were influenced by Merck’s flashy PR campaign, allowing for its quick ascent up the vaccination ladder.

The most scandalous policy concerning Gardasil is the U.S. State Department’s requirement that all immigrant women receive at least one of the three-shot series before being granted access to live and work legally in the country. There is no such requirement for U.S. citizens. This is problematic for several reasons. While there is already a long list of required vaccinations, this is the first that concerns an STI; all others concern highly contagious and life threatening diseases, most of which are air-borne and can be spread through general contact, while HPV can only be spread sexually. Requiring a vaccine of this sort, therefore, vilifies the sexuality of immigrant women, and suggests that they are somehow more sexually licentious than U.S. citizens. Furthermore, requiring immigrant women to have the vaccine while U.S. women may choose whether or not to renders them “test subjects,” according to the National Coalition for Immigration Women’s Rights. If the vaccine is completely safe and effective, why not require it for all women in the U.S., regardless of their citizenship status? Finally, the high cost of the vaccine arguably creates another barrier for immigrant women, who are already paying upwards of $500 in application fees to enter the country. Requiring a single dose that costs approximately $120 significantly increases the financial burden of legally entering the country.