Merck, maker of the cervical cancer vaccine Gardasil, is backing off its lobbying campaign following pressure from medical groups and parents who believe the vaccine should not be mandated as a school attendance requirement for adolescent girls.

The public outcry that caused Merck to announce its stop order on Tuesday stems from the fact that the vaccine protects against the sexually transmitted human papilloma virus (HPV), which causes cervical cancer. School-mandated vaccines are typically for diseases spread through casual contact, such as measles and mumps.

Merck's medical director for vaccines, Dr. Richard M. Haupt says, "We're concerned that our role in supporting school requirements is a distraction from that goal, and as such have suspended our lobbying efforts," adding that the company will continue providing information about the vaccine upon request.

Gardasil, launched in June and the first vaccine to prevent cervical cancer, has inspired controversy since day one. There's the cost -- $360 for three required shots -- and all sorts of insurance concerns and conservative groups who worry the vaccine encourages premarital sex and interferes with parental rights. Even those in support of the vaccine -- like the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American Academy of Family Practitioners -- question Merck's quick push to market this drug, especially in light of the company's withdrawn painkiller Vioxx.

"I believe that their timing was a little bit premature so soon after (Gardasil's) release, before we have a picture of whether there are going to be any untoward side effects," says Dr. Anne Francis, who chairs an American Academy of Pediatrics committee.

Legislatures in 20 states have taken steps to mandate the vaccine for young girls. And with the exception of Texas governor Rick Perry's February 2 executive order requiring Texas girls entering the sixth grade in 2008 get vaccinated, nothing has been made official so far.

It has just recently been discovered that CT scans for children have been inappropriately used in two Ontario hospitals. As a result, some children have received excessive doses of radiation, putting them at greater risk of developing cancer later in life.

Staff at the two hospitals -- Peterborough Regional Health Centre is one -- reported that in close to 50 percent of selected cases, the appropriate equipment settings were not used.

Herein lies the problem -- developing organs are more susceptible to damage, and giving a small child an adult dose of radiation in a CT scan delivers the same amount of radiation as 4,000 traditional X-rays. Research shows that increased exposure to radiation over time can cause radiation-induced cancer.

CT scans are valuable diagnostic tools because they create 3-D images of organs, offering a better view of head injuries, chest trauma, cancer, and fractures. So they should not be disregarded -- but clearly, hospitals need to improve the management of all scanning procedures.

In Ontario, a diagnostic image safety committee has already been formed. The goal of this committee is to develop standards and do a better job of tracking radiation levels.

Experts are encouraging Ontario parents to refrain from worry unless their children have received many CT scans. And all parents are encouraged to speak up before their children receive CT scans. "Is my child receiving a pediatric protocol?" is all it takes.

Republican Senator Gordon Smith of Oregon calls home DNA kits for cancer and other diseases as nothing more than modern day snake oil and he believes consumers are being misled and exploited.

Smith, chairman of the Senate Special Committee on Aging, released a report from the Government Accountability Office on home DNA test products. He stated he is shocked to learn how little the federal government is doing to protect consumers in awareness and education regarding the uselessness of these products.

According to a Congressional report, home DNA tests or nutrigenetic tests, are not clinically valid and companies selling them are making unproven and ambiguous health-related predictions.

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services said they were investigating the companies to determine is oversight was needed.