I do not think that you necessarily need to infer that

Reply Thu 24 Jan, 2019 08:43 am
I don't understand "I do not think that you necessarily need to infer that" - Why not? Is such inferring harmful?


One notable exception to the abstinence only refrain of the family-values groups is Focus on the Family. Reginald Finger, a public health physician and the medical issue analyst for the organization , serves on the CDC's Advisory Committee for Immunization Practices. 'If three doses of HPV vaccine is going to produce efficacy over a young-adult lifetime, then [age 12] might be a good time to reach them, just because they're easier to reach and you can implement a system for doing that with the adolescent visit,' he says. 'I do not think that you necessarily need to infer that if you're giving it to 12 year olds, that 12 year olds are suspected to be at risk right then.' HPV, he notes, can be a long-lasting infection, to the point that it may be a risk even to people who have been abstinent until marriage. 'With HPV, you could have a person in their 20s, never sexually active before marriage, marrying someone who has had a sexual history in their teens, who has turned around their lifestyle and had been abstinent for eight years,' he says. 'Then all of a sudden, you have a situation where it's possible HPV could be an issue.'

  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Question • Score: 2 • Views: 551 • Replies: 4
No top replies

View best answer, chosen by oristarA
  Selected Answer
Reply Thu 24 Jan, 2019 03:16 pm
oristarA wrote:
I don't understand "I do not think that you necessarily need to infer that" - Why not?
Because such an inference would be incorrect.

He is saying that the reason for giving the vaccine to 12 year olds is not due to a belief that those 12 year olds are immediately at risk.

oristarA wrote:
Is such inferring harmful?
Perhaps not. If someone gave the vaccine to 12 year olds, and erroneously believed that the vaccinations were because the 12 year olds were facing an immediate risk, I do not see how this erroneous belief would cause harm.

On the other hand, if someone erroneously believed that the vaccine should only be given to people who are at immediate risk, and if they failed to vaccinate a 12 year old because they assessed that there was no immediate risk, that failure to vaccinate the child would be harmful.

I believe the idea behind vaccinating 12 year olds, even if there is no immediate risk, is because it may not be apparent to the adults when a child becomes sexually active. Better to get the vaccination done early, just to ensure that it is done before the child becomes sexually active.
0 Replies
Reply Fri 25 Jan, 2019 01:20 am
So Reginald Finger was suggesting the vaccination of 12 years old?

Thank you.
Reply Fri 25 Jan, 2019 06:57 am

Give the vaccination at age 12, even though they might not need its benefit until much later.
0 Replies
Jewels Vern
Reply Fri 25 Jan, 2019 11:14 pm
It is very common for people to use words and expressions without regard to their meanings. There are many examples. "Necessarily" is one of them. People get used to using that word and they forget what it means. It means "needfully". It does not belong before "need".

The quote actually means "I do not think you need to say ..."

Maybe you agree with that and maybe you don't.
0 Replies

Related Topics

show difference - Question by subhrakanta
Assertive to exclamatory - Question by Mushfiq2001
What he believes he is is he is not. - Question by davidasks
English Grammar Question - Question by Behindthewheel
use of "there is/are" - Question by lothar
Help! 3rd Grade Grammar Stumper - Question by tgeor724
I will dog walk you - Question by oristarA
closes on - Question by oristarA
  1. Forums
  2. » I do not think that you necessarily need to infer that
Copyright © 2022 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 08/07/2022 at 03:16:10