Whether the FDA decides to approve Gardasil® for boys, or not, it seems likely that many government-payers, and insurance companies will take heed of this Harvard School of Public Health study -- per the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, tonight:
. . . .Last month, a U.S. Food and Drug Administration panel recommended expanding use of the Gardasil vaccine to males aged 9 to 26 to protect them from genital warts, but the cost effectiveness of such a program was unclear at the time.
But researchers from the Harvard School of Public Health conducted such an analysis comparing a girls-only vaccination program with a co-ed vaccination program. Currently, Gardasil is approved for girls aged 9 and over to protect them from cervical cancer.
"This study found that while vaccine coverage and efficacy are high in girls, including boys in an HPV vaccination program generally exceeds what the U.S. typically considers good value for money," said lead researcher Jane Kim, an assistant professor of health decision science.The report is published in the Oct. 9 online edition of the British Medical Journal. . . .
Again, while this vaccine has a place -- it is no panacea for preventing cervical cancer. And the sooner Merck reconciles itself to this fact, the better. Especially for Merck's shareholders -- so that the company suspends these unrealistic efforts, and runaway expenses -- all designed to shove the jab into the collective-arms of a population that will see only a marginal cost-adjusted health benefit.
No comments:
Post a Comment