Thomas Coburn

Mr. COBURN

Mr. COBURN. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution (H. Res. 278) expressing the sense of the House of Representatives regarding the importance of education, early detection and treatment, and other efforts in the fight against breast cancer.

Mr. COBURN. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. COBURN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on this legislation and to insert extraneous material on the bill.

Mr. COBURN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I want to relate a story about a woman by the name of Sharon Coburn Wetz. She was a scrub nurse RN for a surgeon in Midwest City, Oklahoma. The vast majority of her early career was spent in assisting on surgery of the breast. Ironically, in 1983 she developed breast cancer herself as a very young woman. This last year she died as a result of that disease. She spent the 15 years before she died doing nothing but helping other women in diagnosis, treatment and reaching for recovery as an expert in mammography, treatment medically and assistance in the breast cancer center at the University of Oklahoma. I think it is fitting that her name be mentioned at this time because in the true spirit of most women and most mothers, what she did was gave of herself. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from New Hampshire (Mr. Bass) for the concluding statements.

Mr. COBURN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Shaw).

Mr. COBURN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. In response, I would just say I would hope that the gentlewoman would help us provide the knowledge about human papilloma virus as she has on this because that causes 99 percent of the cervical cancer in this country and we have an attempt at covering up the pathogenesis and the significant penetration of that disease in this country. I thank the gentlewoman for her work. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. COBURN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the gentleman from New Hampshire (Mr. Bass) for his leadership on this resolution. It is important to note that in fact information is power and power leads to decisions that can save people's lives. The other thing I would like to answer in direction to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Brown) and his comments, we have the breast and cervical awareness bill that is being held up at this very time. The reason it is not coming out of conference is because there are people who do not want women to have information about cervical cancer. The fact that they are objecting to the fact that women would be notified that human pappiloma virus, the number one sexually transmitted disease in the country that infects almost 40 million women today and 30 million men, is the number one cause 99 percent of the time that causes cervical cancer and we cannot get that bill that will help women of moderate and poor means the treatment that they need for breast and cervical cancer is because somebody does not want them to have that information. And so, the people that do not want women to have that information are the people that do not want us to ever do anything despite the fact that condoms are not 100 percent effective protection, and in fact they are not protective at all according to the director of the NIH and the National Cancer Institute. So, back to the subject at hand. This is an important bill. I am very thankful to the gentleman from New Hampshire (Mr. Bass), as is the whole Committee on Commerce, for his leadership in this. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. COBURN

Mr. COBURN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I want to read some literature from experts at the National Cancer Institute and the American Cancer Society, their published statements, and I will include them for the record. This is a quote from the National Cancer Institute: ``Condoms are ineffective against human papilloma virus because the virus is present not only in the mucosal tissue, but also on dry skin of the surrounding abdomen and groin, and it can migrate from those areas into other areas into the vagina and the cervix. Additional research efforts by NCI on the effectiveness of virus transmission are not warranted.'' The American Cancer Society recent research shows that condoms cannot protect against infection with HPV. The absence of visible signs of this disease cannot be used to decide whether caution is warranted since this disease can be passed on to another person when there are no visible signs of the disease externally. That is the American Cancer Society and the National Institutes of Health. National Institutes of Health, April 3, 1996, the data on the use of barrier methods of contraception condoms to prevent the spread of human papilloma virus is controversial but does not support it as an effective method of prevention. I include for the Record the following information: Do Condoms Protect Against HPV Infection?--According to the Scientific Experts, the Answer Is a Resounding and Conclusive ``NO''. national cancer institute ``Condoms are ineffective against HPV because the virus is prevalent not only in mucosal tissue (genitalia) but also on dry skin of the surrounding abdomen and groin, and it can migrate from those areas into the vagina and the cervix. Additional research efforts by NCI on the effectiveness of condoms in preventing HPV transmission are not warranted.''-- Excerpt from a February 19, 1999 letter to House Commerce Committee Chairman Tom Bliley from Dr. Richard D. Klausner, Director of the National Cancer Institute at the National Institutes of Health. american cancer society ``Recent research shows that condoms (``rubbers'') cannot protect against infection with HPV. This is because HPV can be passed from person to person with any skin-to-skin contact with any HPV-infected area of the body, such as skin of the genital or anal area not covered by the condom. The absence of visible warts cannot be used to decide whether caution is warranted, since HPV can be passed on to another person even when there are no visible warts or other symptoms. HPV can be present for years with no symptoms.''--Excerpt from the American Cancer Society website (www.cancer.org). national institutes of health ``The data on the use of barrier methods of contraception to prevent the spread of HPV is controversial but does not support this as an effective method of prevention. . . . Reducing the rate of HPV infection by encouraging changes in the sexual behavior of young people and/or through developing an effective HPV vaccine would reduce the incidence of this disease.''--National Institutes of Health Consensus Development Conference Statement on Cervical Cancer, April 1- 3, 1996. Mr. Speaker, the reason that is important is we have a breast and cervical cancer treatment bill by the gentleman from New York (Mr. Lazio) and the gentlewoman from North Carolina (Mrs. Myrick) that is being held up at this time on the basis of the Senate conferees not wanting to agree to the language in that in regards to HPV and cervical cancer. Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the body that they would put pressure on their fellow Senators that they might accede to this. The fact is, the reason we have this awareness up is we want women to get treated. This is a disease that is absolutely curable. It is not like breast cancer; we cannot always cure breast cancer. This disease, if diagnosed properly and treated, is 100 percent curable. Knowledge and the fact that we are allowing a safe sex message of condoms preventing this disease to continue will do nothing but harm women. It will not undermine anybody's position on sexuality or abortion or any other issue. The fact is, it is harmful to women to let that lie continue. Mr. Speaker, I would ask that as we support this, that we remember what we are really talking about is our sisters, our nieces and our daughters in the future that they would be given the knowledge with which to make great decisions, and the knowledge is that a condom does not prevent transmission of this disease. And until young women know that and know that certainly so that they can make a different choice, at least allow the young women in this country the ability to make an informed choice. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. COBURN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Shaw).

Mr. COBURN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, prior to coming to Congress, I had a full-time practice in obstetrics and family medicine; and it was not uncommon that 50 to 200 times a year I would diagnose cervical cancer, and over the 15 years in practice prior to coming here, what I saw was an ever- increasing number of people who were being diagnosed with either cancer or pre-cancer of their cervix. What we have come to know on the science of this is this is all caused by one virus, different strains of the same virus. Squamous carcinoma of the cervix is rarely caused by anything other than human papilloma virus. What we have today is a bill to make awareness of this issue for women in our country. I want to thank the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Millender- McDonald) for her work in this area, and also in the area of HIV and her care for those most affected by this. Raising the awareness of the high risk of cervical cancer is important not just to the more mature women in our country, but also to the young women in our country. Along with that comes the very sad fact that our institutions that we should be trusting in this area have failed us. The Center for Disease Control has failed, because the full name of the Center for Disease Control is the Center for Disease Control and Prevention. The NIH has released a statement, as well as NCI, and on their Web site you can find that this disease is caused by human papilloma virus and that a condom fails to protect. We are so sold on this concept of ``safe sex'' in this country that we refuse to accept the etiology and pathogenesis of this disease, and we refuse to be honest with the American public in that a condom cannot protect them from this. The thing that is exciting to me about this resolution coming up is it perhaps will have some honesty coming out of the institutions that are funded with the taxpayers' money in this country, both the NIH and the NCI, as well as the CDC. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. COBURN. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 64) recognizing the severity of the issue of cervical health, and for other purposes.

Mr. COBURN

Mr. COBURN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H. Con. Res. 64.

Mr. COBURN

Mr. COBURN. I do not know Virginia, but other States, if you have the information of public health knowledge that is considered confidential, then there is no right to distribute that information.

Mr. COBURN. No, I will not acknowledge.

Mr. COBURN. If the gentleman will yield, they are not exposed to the world, they are only exposed to the world if in fact it comes to trial. What is exposed today is those people who are plea bargaining to get out of the rape charge by granting testing for HIV.

Mr. COBURN. Right. And today we do the exact same thing on syphilis. Let me put forward to the gentleman that, number one, do we serve society's greater good if in fact we limit the spread of the disease; number two, do we serve the victim's greater good; and, number three, if in fact all those individuals that the gentleman mentioned are professional, they can be held in conduct claims against their own professionalism if in fact they divulge it. The final point I would make in terms of the gentleman's argument is that it should be exposed. If somebody, in law, has violated somebody else and has given them a disease, one of the things we do when one is convicted of a felony is they lose certain rights.

Mr. COBURN. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. COBURN. Reclaiming my time, Mr. Speaker, the gentleman knows that I have nothing to do with that. That is not changing the fact that we are here to discuss the facts of this bill.

Mr. COBURN. I yield to the gentleman from Virginia.

Mr. COBURN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me the time. Mr. Speaker, I say to my associate, the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Scott), that I would like to address three or four questions. Number one is, one of the bases of his arguments is that there is no integrity in the testing system in terms of confidentiality; that has been proven totally false, the basis of that claim. We as a medical community, as a public health community have not allowed leaks; that is exactly the same argument that was stated when children are born to mothers with HIV that they would not come in and get tested because somebody would find out. In fact, what has happened is we have even more women coming in and getting tested because all women are interested in their children. Mr. Speaker, the assumption that there is not integrity in the testing process and somebody outside who absolutely needs to know will violate that person's right is an erroneous assumption, and it is one that is continually used in the HIV epidemic. The other point that I would make, so that the gentleman would surely know this, is that out of the 1.2 million people who have been infected with HIV thus far in our country, 600,000 of them still do not know they have HIV; they still do not know if they have HIV. So whether or not an HIV test is appropriate or a non-HIV test is appropriate, there is enough behavior in our country that is not malicious that is associated with HIV infection that nobody knows who is HIV infected and who is not, because they all look the same. HIV is not a regarder of persons of color or sex or life-style. It does not care. It does infect. The other question that I would ask from the gentleman is, this is really a question of squaring off of rights. The gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Scott) has a great record of protecting individual's rights, and I think that is very important, that we could not ignore it. I want to read through a few sets of stories and tell me whether or not we ought to be protecting the rights of the rapist or the accused rapist or the accused molester or those that were, in fact, victims of it. 41-year-old Alabama man raped a 4-year-old girl, infecting her with HIV which later claimed her life, 1996. Had we known at the time his HIV status, the little girl would be alive. As a matter of fact, what we know now is if, in fact, we treat early, multiple times, we eliminate the infection, even if there was positive HIV there. That knowledge within a 72-hour frame will give us an opportunity to have at least one aspect of an assault reversed. A 35-year-old man in Iowa raped a 15-year-old girl and her 69-year- old grandmother. He was infected with HIV. No access to know. They did not know it until after the fact, until somebody became positive. In New Jersey, 3 boys gang raped a 10-year-old mentally retarded girl. The girl's family demanded that the boys be HIV tested. Three years after the girl was raped and the boys were convicted, the family was still fighting to learn the HIV status of the attackers. I believe that our law is based on balance, balance of both sets of rights and the claim that we cannot know. As a matter of fact, let me just change direction. We would not even be having this discussion today if we handled HIV like the infectious disease that it should be. That fact, if we had proper partner notification, proper follow-up, proper exposure follow-up, this would not even be a question on the House floor, but because we did the politically correct thing at the wrong time and did not treat it like the disease it is, we now have 600,000 Americans that have died from it. I think the question is, are we for the rapists or are we for the molesters? Are we for those people who take advantage of others in terms of life beyond the attempt to harm someone, or are we for the victims? So the real test of this vote this evening in the Chamber is people are going to line up. They are either going to be for rapists and molesters, or they are going to be for the victims. That is certainly somewhat of an oversimplification, but we would not be here if we did not have the same rationalization that the gentleman put forward before, that we cannot test people and hold that confidential.

Mr. COBURN. If the gentleman will continue to yield, the gentleman's contention is that for those people today presently infected by HIV, it is more important to maintain their confidentiality than to treat and keep somebody else from getting HIV? That is what the gentleman just said. That is exactly how we have handled this epidemic. That is what is wrong with it.

Mr. COBURN. Mr. Speaker, I would just ask the gentleman to think, if one of his family members----

Mr. COBURN. Right.

Mr. COBURN. At what time?

Mr. COBURN. I have read the bill.