The new Gardasil vaccine, which was developed to protect women from infection by the highest risk HPV types and also prevent cervical cancer, has been in the middle of a whirlwind of publicity since its FDA approval last summer.

The vaccine, developed by Merck & Co., is said to be a real breakthrough in preventing cervical cancer and is aimed at young females between 9 and 26 years of age. After the FDA announcement of the vaccine, Merck had been on an all-out campaign, until just recently, to convince states to mandate the vaccine for adolescent girls entering the sixth grade.

The reason? The vaccine is most effective if given to girls before they become sexually active.

The idea of mandating the vaccine has drawn wide response across the nation. Texas Gov. Rick Perry is the only governor to sign an executive order mandating the vaccine, and more than two dozen other states have been considering similar legislation.

We can’t remember another drug that has been on this kind of fast track as far as publicity or a drug company’s efforts to get states to adjust their public policy.

Advocates for mandating the drug say it makes perfect sense for states to mandate it because it is the first cancer prevention breakthrough. Opponents say it’s too soon to be considering mandating the drug, and that such a mandate conflicts with parental rights.

While we believe there should be widespread education about the drug and what it can do, we do think states and lawmakers need to slow down a bit before issuing mandates for all adolescent girls to receive the vaccine.

First of all, the virus the vaccine is meant to prevent is not on the same par as other immunizations required for children. Measles, mumps and rubella are highly contagious diseases that can be spread among school-age children just by their being close to one another in a classroom.

The HPV virus is different in that there must be skin-to-skin contact, or in the cervical cancer cases, genital contact for it to occur. There are real issues to think about with regard to how parents of girls want to approach this new drug and how they want to communicate with their children about it.

We do believe there needs to be debate in state legislatures about this new drug and what it can do and to raise awareness about how this immunization could save lives. We also hope physicians and pediatricians communicate with their patients and their parents about the drug and help them in making the decision about when, or if, to give the immunization.

The clinical trials on this drug are impressive, and physicians are very encouraged this vaccine will prevent cervical cancer. What needs to happen now is more public conversation and education about the vaccine. Although the first study on side effects is very positive, we need to see more data on any complications or problems that may arise from this vaccine.

There may come a time in the future when it will make good sense to reconsider these mandates. But, we’re not there yet.