“I never thought that now, in the twenty-first century, we could have a debate about what to do with a vaccine that prevents cancer”

—David Baltimore, quoted in Michael Specter’s excellent overview in The New Yorker (March 13) of politicized science policy in the United States. You can read a Q&A with Specter here.

Baltimore is referring to the uncertain fate of Merck’s effective vaccine against human papillomavirus, the primary cause of cervical cancer. The vaccine is now under consideration at the FDA and, according to Specter, could be approved as early as June. After that, the US Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices will make its ostensibly non-binding recommendations as to whether it should be required for children to attend public school. Specter implies that this is by no means certain, owing to abstinence campaigns in the US (the opponents’ idea being that vaccination would encourage teenage sex). Putting aside the flaws in this logic, an article published last year in New Scientist explains that the likely difficulties this vaccine will face extend to many countries around the world.