6 ms·

That's nice to know. I assumed that there would be a cost barrier too access as with most US health care.

microcolonel 8y ago
Genuine Merck MMR vaccine comes in packs of ten, priced at ~$21 USD (for CDC, standard MSRP is 75, still not really expensive), takes about ten seconds to administer. It's an amount of money that any number of people in anyone's life (unless you have no friends, family, neighbours, or colleagues at all) in the U.S. could lose by accident on a given day. https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/programs/vfc/awardees/vaccine-management/price-list/index.html https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/programs/vfc/awardees/vaccine-m...
amluto 8y ago
Last flu season, I walked into Kaiser and got a flu shot in about five minutes total. I’m not a Kaiser member, and they didn’t even ask for billing info.
- wemdyjreichert 8y ago
  That's one thing we've done pretty well, bringing down the cost of critical vaccines. Others are expensive, but they are mostly elective. If you look at the CDC price list [0] for kids, only 2 vaccines are over $200 for private sector cost, and they're not too important (one is MMR/Varicella which covers what would otherwise be two vaccines, and the other is HPV which is unimportant). Even cheaper for adults. That's within the price range of pretty much anyone.
  - bmalak 8y ago
    > HPV which is unimportant Wrong. HPV vaccine is super important. In 2018 nearly 580k women were diagnosed with cervical cancer. 70% of said cancer is caused by HPV (by two strains of it to be exact). So that is 406k women each year getting cervical cancer which could have been prevented if they were vaccinated, and that’s only counting people who were diagnosed. Now consider that HPV is also known to cause cancers in other organs, both reproductive and non-reproductive, and that these affect not only women but men as well. Granted only 14 of the 100+ strains are linked to cancer, but still. That’s a lot of preventable cancer. The CDC recommends the vaccine for basically everyone up to 26, and the FDA has approved a vaccine for up to 45. https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/human-papillomavirus-(hpv)-and-cervical-cancer https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/human-papil...
    - wemdyjreichert 8y ago
      HPV is elective, because activities that cause it are elective. Cancer-causing strains are transmitted largely by risky behavior, which is a choice. That is why I called it elective. Being in a room with someone with measles can cause you to get it; being in a room with someone with cancer-causing HPV cannot. It requires a conscious choice. Edit: down-voters care to explain why I'm wrong?
      - technofiend 8y ago
        >HPV is elective, because activities that cause it are elective. This is patently absurd because if nothing else it's unfortunately a fact not all exposure to HPV is elective. Did you miss the recent article about a baby born with HPV nodes on her throat that damaged her vocal cords? By vaccinating the mother and the father and preventing them from having HPV there's no chance of in-vitro tranmission to the child. Just as vaccinating for tetanus, measles mumps and rubella and all the rest building herd immunity prevents current and future generations from passing on the disease. And regardless of your implied moral judgements preventing a cancer-causing disease is a net benefit to public health.
        wemdyjreichert 8y ago
        > no chance A 100% effective vaccination? Also, I didn't imply any moral judgement, I'm simply stating it's not as important as others. With respect to the baby story, was that a strain which was prevented by a HPV vaccination? I understand there is a benefit, and wasn't disputing that. All I was saying was that it was elective and less important. There is a reason it is not required for schools as MMR is, and that it is not standard.
        technofiend 8y ago
        You're not implying that if people just abstained from sex they wouldn't need the HPV vaccination? That's a judgement about people having pre-marital sex, is it not? And your stance that it's "less important" is based on the idea that simply abstaining from sex prevents all HPV exposure, correct? That is not a science-based conclusion. HPV can be transmitted outside of sex by walking barefoot across a bathroom floor. But if you want a morality-driven argument it is IMHO undeniably imperative to vaccinate the general public against disease including cancer causing disease regardless of the mode of transmission of said disease and that imperative and benefits outweigh any counter argument that simply abstaining from a given behavior lowers that risk. If I can find the citation for the article I mentioned (I did Google for it but couldn't find it the first time) I'll happily address whether in fact it's one prevented by Gardasil, etc.
rchaud 8y ago
"By taking a strong pro-choice stand on vaccinations, we'll be saving the American healthcare system millions in costs while ignoring the time bomb that'll realistically only go off when the opposition is in power". Yeah I wouldn't be surprised if that's the route the US is headed regarding vax policy.
droithomme 8y ago
> That's nice to know. It's also not correct. I have to pay for all my vaccinations, and have had to do so in all the various states I've lived in, including California. The US does not have a program of free vaccines for the population. If people have insurance that pays for it, the insurance covers it, but that's not the same as free. Elsewhere in this thread a med student relates his experience of getting his MMR booster for "free", but administering it was $500 per shot, later raised to $700. The free was also not free, the student insurance paid for the shot itself and he merely had to pay for the administration. This is a more typical vaccination scenario in the US. Also worth noting is that very very few of the people commenting in any discussion of vaccines are up to date with their boosters because very few adults in general are up to date.
- tapland 8y ago
  Yes. The whooping cough vaccination is active for little over 10 years.

Genuine Merck MMR vaccine comes in packs of ten, priced at ~$21 USD (for CDC, standard MSRP is 75, still not really expensive), takes about ten seconds to administer. It's an amount of money that any number of people in anyone's life (unless you have no friends, family, neighbours, or colleagues at all) in the U.S. could lose by accident on a given day. https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/programs/vfc/awardees/vaccine-management/price-list/index.html https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/programs/vfc/awardees/vaccine-m...

amluto 8y ago

Last flu season, I walked into Kaiser and got a flu shot in about five minutes total. I’m not a Kaiser member, and they didn’t even ask for billing info.

wemdyjreichert 8y ago
That's one thing we've done pretty well, bringing down the cost of critical vaccines. Others are expensive, but they are mostly elective. If you look at the CDC price list [0] for kids, only 2 vaccines are over $200 for private sector cost, and they're not too important (one is MMR/Varicella which covers what would otherwise be two vaccines, and the other is HPV which is unimportant). Even cheaper for adults. That's within the price range of pretty much anyone.
- bmalak 8y ago
  > HPV which is unimportant Wrong. HPV vaccine is super important. In 2018 nearly 580k women were diagnosed with cervical cancer. 70% of said cancer is caused by HPV (by two strains of it to be exact). So that is 406k women each year getting cervical cancer which could have been prevented if they were vaccinated, and that’s only counting people who were diagnosed. Now consider that HPV is also known to cause cancers in other organs, both reproductive and non-reproductive, and that these affect not only women but men as well. Granted only 14 of the 100+ strains are linked to cancer, but still. That’s a lot of preventable cancer. The CDC recommends the vaccine for basically everyone up to 26, and the FDA has approved a vaccine for up to 45. https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/human-papillomavirus-(hpv)-and-cervical-cancer https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/human-papil...
  - wemdyjreichert 8y ago
    HPV is elective, because activities that cause it are elective. Cancer-causing strains are transmitted largely by risky behavior, which is a choice. That is why I called it elective. Being in a room with someone with measles can cause you to get it; being in a room with someone with cancer-causing HPV cannot. It requires a conscious choice. Edit: down-voters care to explain why I'm wrong?
    - technofiend 8y ago
      >HPV is elective, because activities that cause it are elective. This is patently absurd because if nothing else it's unfortunately a fact not all exposure to HPV is elective. Did you miss the recent article about a baby born with HPV nodes on her throat that damaged her vocal cords? By vaccinating the mother and the father and preventing them from having HPV there's no chance of in-vitro tranmission to the child. Just as vaccinating for tetanus, measles mumps and rubella and all the rest building herd immunity prevents current and future generations from passing on the disease. And regardless of your implied moral judgements preventing a cancer-causing disease is a net benefit to public health.
      - wemdyjreichert 8y ago
        > no chance A 100% effective vaccination? Also, I didn't imply any moral judgement, I'm simply stating it's not as important as others. With respect to the baby story, was that a strain which was prevented by a HPV vaccination? I understand there is a benefit, and wasn't disputing that. All I was saying was that it was elective and less important. There is a reason it is not required for schools as MMR is, and that it is not standard.
        technofiend 8y ago
        You're not implying that if people just abstained from sex they wouldn't need the HPV vaccination? That's a judgement about people having pre-marital sex, is it not? And your stance that it's "less important" is based on the idea that simply abstaining from sex prevents all HPV exposure, correct? That is not a science-based conclusion. HPV can be transmitted outside of sex by walking barefoot across a bathroom floor. But if you want a morality-driven argument it is IMHO undeniably imperative to vaccinate the general public against disease including cancer causing disease regardless of the mode of transmission of said disease and that imperative and benefits outweigh any counter argument that simply abstaining from a given behavior lowers that risk. If I can find the citation for the article I mentioned (I did Google for it but couldn't find it the first time) I'll happily address whether in fact it's one prevented by Gardasil, etc.

rchaud 8y ago

"By taking a strong pro-choice stand on vaccinations, we'll be saving the American healthcare system millions in costs while ignoring the time bomb that'll realistically only go off when the opposition is in power". Yeah I wouldn't be surprised if that's the route the US is headed regarding vax policy.

droithomme 8y ago

> That's nice to know. It's also not correct. I have to pay for all my vaccinations, and have had to do so in all the various states I've lived in, including California. The US does not have a program of free vaccines for the population. If people have insurance that pays for it, the insurance covers it, but that's not the same as free. Elsewhere in this thread a med student relates his experience of getting his MMR booster for "free", but administering it was $500 per shot, later raised to $700. The free was also not free, the student insurance paid for the shot itself and he merely had to pay for the administration. This is a more typical vaccination scenario in the US. Also worth noting is that very very few of the people commenting in any discussion of vaccines are up to date with their boosters because very few adults in general are up to date.

tapland 8y ago
Yes. The whooping cough vaccination is active for little over 10 years.