h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

>>>My goal in this particular conversation is to ensure that no one needlessly dies from cervical cancer. A good goal, I hope you'll agree, but perhaps tactlessly done.

JCNSmith, we are happy to add the vaccine link to the entry. However, we must strongly point out in no uncertain terms, h2g2 is definitely NOT the place to go for medical help. h2g2 entries should NEVER be seen as a matter of 'life and death'. Anyone who has any questions of this sort should always seek advice from a medical professional.

Amen! But perhaps someone who might not see a reference to the vaccine elsewhere might accidentally stumble onto it here, which perhaps could save a life. That possibility makes it worth a footnote, imho.

The reason I did not include mention of the vaccine in the entry was because it was specifically about having a smear test in the uk..ie what the test is, how it is performed and what may happen after. Where does the vaccine fit into this? If that is to now be included so should all other points and treatments relating to cervical cancer be included no? making the original focus of the entry pretty pointless.

Serephina,
I'm truly sorry if you feel unjustly attacked and/or criticized by my suggestion for the inclusion of the anti-cancer vaccine footnote. At the same time, however, I can't understand your rigid insistence on such a narrow focus for the entry, especially when adding one tiny footnote potentially could save lives. In my mind it would be like doing an entry on John F. Kennedy and not mentioning Lee Harvey Oswald, on the grounds that, technically speaking, he didn't have anything to do with Kennedy's "life," per se. Just his death. I guess we'll just need to agree to disagree about this. Anyway, as the saying goes, aside from that, how did you like the play, Mrs. Lincoln? Aside from my quibble, a nice entry. Sorry if I've spoiled the experience for you.

No i was merely saying that if that is to be included why not every other possibility and treatment around cervical cancer? I wouldd understand your point if the entry was about the cancer itself, but it isn't it's about a test and how it is currently perfomed in the UK specifically. Why don't you write an entry on cervical cancer itself and include the vaccine?

For openers, the extent of my knowledge about cervical cancer is that some of my friends have had it and I don't like it and I wish the vaccine had been available sooner so they wouldn't have had to deal with it. Somehow don't think that qualifies me as an expert on cervical cancer.

And I guess if anyone did write an entry about cervical cancer it would be inappropriate to mention the vaccine anyway, because the entry would be specifically about cervical cancer, and not about vaccines.

Hi JC. Hope you don't mind me saying, you seem to have a bee in your bonnet about this vaccine. As has already been made clear, numerous times, this article is about the smear test NOT about cancer treatment.

Perhaps you could write a follow up article on treatment for cancer in which you could include the vaccine bearing in mind it's not widely available everywhere, is not the panacea of treatment and has some ethical and moral questions to be answered as well.

A shameless plug here, read my article on Heart Disease and angina. This covers the condition, diagnosis, the causes and the avaiable treatments but in no way is medical advice and is a general overview for the condition.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/A9948199

Serephinas article is clearly aimed at just the test and test procedures for a particular potential condition, cervical cancer.

If you read both articles you will see quite clearly then the intent of the articles and why they appear so different.

I think now all thats happening is a regurgeatating of the same arguement on your part and in light of opinion from the Eds as well as others seems to me you need to accept that on this occassion you have made an invalid arguement and to let it drop now.

Whats that old saying again? When in a hole, stop digging.

ST.

Not at all, an entry on the cancer itself would of course include any possible preventative measures as well as treatments curently available.

simpost

> When in a hole, stop digging.<

But wait! Yes! I see light at the bottom of my hole, and I hear people speaking Chinese, and they're all saying they wish Serephina's entry on the smear test had included a footnote on the new vaccine! How can you argue with over a billion people?

>you seem to have a bee in your bonnet about this vaccine<

Seeing as how no one has had the presence of mind to confiscate my shovel, and since I still see a bit of undisturbed turf, I'd like to add that the thing I actually have a bee in my bonnet about, if you'd really care to know, is the (to me) totally bizarre reluctance or unwillingness of people here to take one tiny, painless step to add one tiny footnote that potentially could save a person's life, or even, potentailly, many people's lives. That's what I have a bee in my bonnet about. Yes, of course you have every right to do as you see fit, and I hope you'll grant me the right to respectfully and vehemently disagree with your decision. *Buries shovel*