HPV Vaccination - From Fear to Facts

This discussion emerges from an informal group chat among medical doctors and a few religious scholars with learned backgrounds. The aim is not to impose conclusions, but to build a reasoned understanding for the wider scholarly community, while acknowledging public concerns, historical experiences, and psychological patterns that shape resistance to vaccination. 

• In every field of knowledge, expertise matters. For fiqh or legal issues one turns to legal scholars; for interpretation of religion, to the ulema; for health, the rightful authorities are doctors and medical researchers. Just as one would not trust a non-engineer to build a bridge, for health related issues we should not ignore the voices of those trained in medicine.

• Vaccination is fundamentally different from treatment. Medicine seeks to cure a disease after it has already caused harm, while vaccines strengthen the immune system beforehand, so that when the virus enters, the body is already prepared to fight. This preemptive shield explains why vaccination campaigns have historically reduced or eliminated deadly diseases.

• Not all diseases are vaccine-preventable. Vaccines are effective against illnesses caused by external viruses and bacteria, because the immune system can be trained against them. Conditions such as many cancers arise from internal or genetic malfunctions, where no external target exists for the immune system. Thus, it is unreasonable to expect vaccines for every disease category.

• It is also important to correct misplaced blame. People may live with years of harmful habits - lack of sleep, poor diet, inactive lifestyle, stress - and then, when disease appears, suspicion is directed towards vaccines rather than lifestyle causes. Vaccines cannot undo unhealthy living; they only provide targeted protection against specific viruses. Both personal responsibility for healthy living and medical safeguards are essential.

• HPV is not only girls’ disease, since both men and women can be infected. However, one of the most dangerous consequences of HPV is cervical cancer, which affects only women. Cervical cancer is among the leading causes of cancer-related deaths in women, especially in countries where regular medical screening and treatment are limited. This is why vaccination programs often focus on girls: by protecting them early, most cases of cervical cancer can be prevented before they ever develop. Vaccinating girls first is therefore a life-saving priority. In countries with more resources, boys are also vaccinated to give them protection and to further reduce the spread of the virus. But the main reason girls are the starting point is because cervical cancer is a women’s disease, and it can be prevented through timely vaccination.

• The principle of risk versus benefit is central to all medicine. Even if a vaccine carries minor side effects, if it prevents widespread cancer, paralysis, or death, the benefit outweighs the risk. Human life and suffering must be measured realistically rather than through exaggerated fears.

• It is also important to emphasize that the use of any vaccine remains the choice of the parent or guardian. Medical ethics require that both the benefits and potential risks of any treatment or vaccine be clearly communicated, allowing informed consent. Presenting possible side effects or limitations does not make a vaccine harmful; it ensures that individuals can make reasoned decisions about health interventions.

• The HPV vaccine has been in use globally since 2006, with countries like the US, Canada, and much of Europe including it in their national immunization programs, demonstrating its safety and effectiveness. During the discussion, China was raised as an example because it initially paused the vaccine after adoption but later restarted gradual pilot programs for adolescent girls. This pause was not due to safety concerns, but rather a combination of rollout strategies, prioritization of other vaccines, funding, and careful monitoring of long-term data. China’s approach clarifies that while the vaccine is well-established worldwide, each country may implement it according to its national health policies and logistical readiness.

• The concern that the HPV vaccine may encourage immorality requires careful clarification. HPV is a virus that can be transmitted within the bounds of marriage; therefore, vaccination serves as a health precaution rather than an endorsement of sinful behavior. Moral and spiritual accountability are separate from medical protection. A vaccine can safeguard the body from disease in this world, but only righteous deeds can protect a person from Allah’s judgment in the Hereafter. In other words, vaccination shields physical health, but it does not relieve one of responsibility for the soul.

• While moral and spiritual values are still considered central to our society, it is important to recognize changing realities. Ignoring rising unsafe sexual practices does not prevent the spread of diseases such as HPV or other sexually transmitted infections. Vaccination offers a necessary health protection in this context, while moral and ethical education must continue, guiding individuals toward responsible behavior.

• Resistance to vaccination is not new. In earlier times, opposition was often framed entirely in religious and moral terms. Some clergy argued that preventing disease through vaccines interfered with divine will, or that it would encourage sin by removing the natural consequences of immoral behavior. This turned a medical question into an exclusively religious debate. Over time, however, reality proved otherwise: communities that resisted remained vulnerable, while those that accepted vaccination saw drastic reductions in suffering. Religious scholarship itself evolved, with many respected scholars later acknowledging that preserving life and preventing harm are core objectives of Shariah. Thus, resistance rooted purely in moral or theological grounds represents one extreme that history and reason have already corrected.

• Lessons from history are clear:

  • Where polio vaccines were resisted, children remained paralyzed for life.

  • Where COVID vaccines were widely used, millions of deaths were prevented, despite ongoing debates about side effects.

  • Where HPV vaccines have been accepted, infection rates and precancerous conditions have dropped dramatically.

  • In the case of tuberculosis (TB) and other compulsory childhood vaccines, history shows that the diseases themselves were so severe, painful, and life-threatening that no parent or society could afford to risk leaving a child unprotected. These vaccines became part of basic child survival, not optional medical choice.

• Conspiracy theories must be understood in their social context. In Pakistan, polio vaccination is still ongoing, but the disease has not been eradicated. A major reason is resistance fueled by persistent rumours - for example, fears that polio drops cause infertility. This mistrust was deepened when the CIA used a fake vaccination campaign in Abbottabad, making many people doubt the intentions behind health programs. During COVID, similar suspicions arose, with claims that Bill Gates was using vaccines to control populations or that hidden chips were being inserted. Such stories spread in part because many people mistrust powerful nations and profit-driven industries, believing that money is valued more than human life. While some pharmaceutical companies, like Pfizer, faced criticism in global media for corporate practices, these episodes cannot erase the overwhelming evidence that vaccines save lives. At the same time, a broader mindset amplifies doubts: the belief that the West keeps every benefit for itself while exporting harm – whether its effects of climate change in the form of floods, earthquakes or rains, or diseases like COVID, polio, or now cervical cancer. Yet diseases are not designed plots; they are shared human challenges faced worldwide. By interpreting every health measure as an external attack, societies deny themselves the very protections other nations routinely use for their own people.

• In our societies, feeling historically dominated has created a mindset of mistrust, where almost every new idea is seen as a leftover of colonialism or a conspiracy coming from the West. This way of thinking, make people resist useful science, technology, and health measures. While the West advanced by trying new things, learning from mistakes, and improving, constantly rejecting innovations because of past grievances blocks progress. True growth needs careful openness, not automatic suspicion.

Conclusion

Vaccination is not just a medical issue - it is a matter of collective reasoning and understanding. Scholars in all fields should recognize that medicine, like jurisprudence or theology, relies on its own methods and evidence. Just as fiqh scholars base rulings on established sources, doctors base their conclusions on clinical trials and decades of research. Ignoring this knowledge, or spreading suspicion without reason, leaves society vulnerable. Even medical practitioners who do not follow updated guidelines and evidence can fall into mistrust or become trapped by conspiracies.

The true balance is to combine moral responsibility with medical precaution: protecting the body through vaccination while safeguarding the soul through righteous deeds. When this harmony is achieved, both human life and ethical and spiritual accountability are respected.

However, public trust can be undermined when vaccines are introduced without proper planning or consent. The rush with which the HPV vaccine was adopted into Pakistan’s National EPI program, especially in contexts like Sindh, reflects governance and implementation challenges. Reports indicate that instead of facilitating informed consent, authority’s prioritization of numbers over public engagement, risks further suspicion and resistance. Every nation has its own social and moral context, and decisions around vaccination must be aligned accordingly.

To build public trust, joint platforms of religious scholars and medical experts are essential. Through dialogue, clear guidance, and credible outreach, communities can embrace the protections science offers without compromising faith or values. Importantly, such discussions should not remain only within scholarly circles—they must reach the public. Platforms like PIMA, where religion and medicine meet, provide an ideal space to start these conversations, but the real impact comes when this knowledge is shared widely, so that the community at large can benefit.

Disclaimer:

This summary has been prepared based on the chat discussion. The compiler was not a participant in the original conversation. Any errors, misinterpretations, or unintended omissions are solely the responsibility of the compiler. The content is presented for scholarly reflection and public understanding and is open for review, clarification, and correction by experts.