HPV vaccination: How the world can eliminate cervical cancer
ourworldindata.org
ourworldindata.org
The rationale is that if you’re 45, you probably already have HPV. But that assumes that you’ve been sexually active all that time. It doesn’t take into account people who were monogamous until their 50s and then started having sex with new partners.
My bias is climbing the hill of convincing on this front 5 years ago and being on the receiving end of a pretty dismissive attitude. But I got my way and think it was the right choice.
While I allow for myself just being ignorant, wrong and vulnerable to working myself up into health scares, I couldn’t help but wonder if men looking into HPV vaccines are brushing up against a doctrinal problem, in that whatever protocols and literature exist for the med field don’t study and don’t mention male-HPV interactions enough to warrant action (or even interest) from GPs as a group.
Best of luck with it!
If it makes you feel any better I live in an EU country with one of the best healthcare systems, or so we keep hearing, and here the public health insurance only covers it for those under 30. What a joke.
And Europeans keep saying how much worse the American system is.
> And Europeans keep saying how much worse the American system is.
There's a reason the comparison is always the average/median situation in the EU vs. the worst possible situation you could be in the US.
I'm not going to start a fight with the local healthcare call center to let me pay the 200-300 euros for a vaccination they think I shouldn't be getting according to every piece of information they publish about it. I know the government is trying to cut costs on healthcare and all, but the resistance the idea that someone without a cervix may benefit from a HPV vaccination annoys me to no end.
Out of all possible healthcare cost cutting measures, charging hundreds for vaccines against diseases that are widely present within the borders of the country must be the stupidest.
That said, I'd much rather take the annoying European healthcare system over the American one. I can get every vaccine out of pocket twice a year and still be cheaper off than with your average American health insurance.
You’ll have to pay for it yourself, though.
Info: https://www.rivm.nl/hpv-humaan-papillomavirus/vaccinatie-hpv...
That cheap? In Austria it's 600 Euros. We're being ripped the fuck off.
In most of Europe you can also still get increased private cover on top of the public cover if you choose and still end up paying a fraction of what the average American pays - you're just always guaranteed a baseline cover.
Like with anything in American healthcare, it’s complicated:
https://www.forbes.com/advisor/health-insurance/health-insur...
https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/immunology/articles/10....
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S00908...
HPV functions by cloaking itself from your immune system. The reason why treatments like freezing work is not by removing the HPV -- it's by stimulating your immune system to look at the area around the wart. Then your immune system can get past the cloaking, and recognize the HPV, and then it destroys it.
So functionally, it makes total sense that the HPV vaccine would clear existing infections, and anecdotally, lots of patients (such as myself) have seen HPV clear after getting the vaccine. It's a shame that our bureaucracy doesn't have the incentives to run the studies to acknowledge it institutionally.
- It targets multiple HPV strains, and even though I've been sexually active, I'm probably unlikely to have all of them, so there is some future protection
- It helps prevent reinfection
- There is evidence that it helps reduce the risk of progression to a cancerous state, which is also something that can happen for males
I didn't even bother to talk to a doctor, I just called a women's clinic, made an appointment, and paid for it myself. They were surprised, but super happy and supportive.
All three injections cost me the equivalent of 160 US$.
Some studies have suggested that even one dose of Gardasil 9 is enough:
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/langlo/article/PIIS2214-1...
I have not been able to find this. Do you happen to have a link to a paper?
This seems to indicate that the vaccine reduces the risk of finding abnormal cells and precancerous lesions for people who already have HPV.
Oh wow in Germany it's 180€ a pop.
Planned Parenthood is great for this kind of thing in the US. I don't know what they charge but just checked and at least the one I've gone to in the past has it.
45 may be young enough to be worth it if the treatment was free, but at ~1,000$ the net benefit is more questionable.
Anyway, at 45+ we are talking something in the range of 10’s of million dollars per cancer case prevented depending on assumptions. That doesn’t mean it’s a terrible idea, just that there’s probably somewhere more productive to do with those resources.
Who’s to say? Maybe I’m a swinger? Maybe I’m divorced? Maybe I’m dating a few people? Maybe that relationship will run its course?
HPV isn’t an STD that condoms address from a risk mitigation perspective. If I’m an adult and identify a risk to my doctor, why shouldn’t a cheap safe and reliable preventative measure not be accessible?
It’s a bizarre proposition to be tabulating the potential future value in this conversation. I can casually ask my doctor for a cialis prescription, which has a similar cost and it will be covered, no problem. If i have a wart caused by an HPV variant, it will be frozen off for a few hundred bucks, no problem.
I think the reality is that the age ranges were picked because for the purposes of the trial process, it was the most convenient.
I wouldn’t call it cheap, but it is available unsubsidized. Which makes sense from the perspective of society in terms of cost vs benefits. Your personal income and risk profile may mean spending money on this is worth it to you, but society is just focusing on averages.
You may think it bizarre but consider this logic.
Let’s suppose for the average 12 year old the number works out to 1 million dollars per cancer prevented. But for 60 year olds it’s 100 million dollars prevents a single cancer on average. The difference coming from reduced future partners, prior exposure, and reduced remaining lifespan. (By reduced future partners, I mean most people have partners between the ages of 12 and 60, so a 12 year old is taking those risks plus the risks from partners after 60.)
Now a billionaire may be happy at even 100 million per prevented cancer, but I think the general public would prefer lower premiums/taxes instead. 45 years old isn’t some magic number it’s just somewhere between extremes. Other countries are using much younger ages.
We don’t apply this logic for most other conditions. I was able to get vaccinated for pneumonia in my 30s because I was a caregiver for my ailing father. It’s not a requirement to get that vaccination, but it made sense given the risk to my father.
So I guess I don’t understand why risk to my 80 year dad was worthy of preventative vaccination, but cancer risk to my current or future partners (or their partners) is not. It’s not cost, as given his health at the time, my dad would be dead in days with pneumonia.
It is allowed, however it isn’t subsidized because there is a high cost and minimal benefit. The pneumonia vaccine on the other hand is cheap and has a much larger benefit.
People over 45 are very likely to already infected with one or more strains at which point the vaccine does almost nothing. It’s far better to give that shot to the younger partner in such relationships because they are at risk either way.
Your argument is logical, but isn’t the logic used for this purpose.
Many vaccines such as for rabies fall into that category for the general public. Rabies is one of the deadliest diseases on the planet and the vaccine works just fine, but not enough people get infected each year to be worth it without some other risk factor.
- There are 200+ HPV strains, the vaccine is directed against the worst 9 but even provides cross protection to some more. You might have some of the magnificent 9, but not all.
- HPV strains can be overcome by the immune system and leave your body. You might get the vaccine while you currently have none of them.
- There is tentative evidence that the vaccine has curative effects.
More couples are divorcing after age 50 than ever before, so this is not just abstract theory.
Also last time I checked the statistics for HPV strains like HPV-6 or HPV-16, only 5% or less of males were infected by that specific strain. So on a single-strain basis it's not quite "you probably already have it". Cumulatively, it is no doubt higher considering all strains, but the argument against vaccination for all strains on the basis that recipients may already have a few of those strains seems flawed.
There are two reasons: one is for personal protection (and most throat cancers are caused by HPV, odds which are likely much more skewed if one does not smoke), and the other is epidemiological - protecting other people, dear ones directly, and the rest of the population by extension.
The myth that it is "only for teenagers" or "before sexual interactions" is a myth. I mean, the ideal scenario is to vaccinate before any potential for infection. Yet, plans to have any sex life it is beneficial. AFAIK, it even helps to clear out existing infections (and well, 80% of men and 90% of women get HPV at least once in their lifetime).
As a male who meets all the criteria to be in a high risk group for HPV throat cancer, and who is dealing with a persistent HPV infection (as proved by warts that won't go away), I'm really sad that I may one day at a young age get cancer in my throat, and there is nothing I can do about it to prevent it. I wish we would put the same amount of energy into inventing vaccines that suppress the virus, or help the body to get rid of them.
I was in a similar situation to you. The doctor said it wasn't indicated for me, but I said I wanted it anyway, and the doctor said ok, and it cleared up my existing HPV infections after dose #2.
You can get it privately most places, and the age limits are likely to keep being pushed.
I live in a part of the world that feels almost too liberal for drugs, but that also means that when I wanted to get the HPV vaccine, I walked into a clinic and got the shot. Then I went to a different country and got the second and third shots.
What's the hold up?
Please keep trying to get your Gardasil-9 shots even against their advice.
The remaining gaps in screening and vaccine uptake reflect broader lack of health-care capabilities that won't be solved with pushing the HPV vaccine alone. Changing from injectable to oral could help, but isn't on the table, and local populations and governments are likely to become increasingly resistant to outsiders waving their science authorities, particularly on family matters.
Both authors are Phd's working in outreach - i.e., they seem to have no experience with deploying HPV campaigns.
For me the explanation of how this vaccine works still confuses me. For example while older people are advised to get Shringix to mitigate the consequences of a reactivated chickenpox virus. Older are advised not to get Gardasil because once you get HPV, the vaccine is ineffective?
https://mainichi.jp/english/articles/20211115/p2a/00m/0op/00...
People in various health care systems around the world have just done a cost benefit analysis and decided that it isn't worth paying for the vaccine for older people, that we'll just let them get cancer and go through treatment/die.
https://www.who.int/publications/m/item/cervical-cancer-jpn-...
https://www.who.int/publications/m/item/cervical-cancer-can-...
It's also down to evidence. It's not that the vaccine has been proven to be ineffective, but that the vaccine had not been proven to be effective enough to be worth it for older groups initially, in large part because it was not what they tested for.
I do not understand this focus on women. Just tell the whole story, that your dick can fall off and every straight frat bro will get vaccinated tomorrow.
Gay men & women often arrive at that position after having had hetero sex. Heterosexuals often "stray" or whatever other euphemism people care to use.
Not all sex is as consensual as it should be, etc, etc.
In any case, what I want to say is: Whether you care about cancer in males or females, males must not be ignored and HPV must not be framed as female only issue. In other words, those 20% of straight men that have the option to stray must get vaccinated as well, if only to protect women.
hear, hear.
"Currently there are six licensed HPV vaccines: three bivalent (protect against two types of HPV), two quadrivalent (against four), and one nonavalent vaccine (against nine)" - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HPV_vaccine
I really don't understand the bias in public health communication here. OWID is making the same mistake again. How are boys supposed to know that they should get the shot, if everybody public health professional fails to tell them?
> HPV is also thought to cause about 95% of anal cancers, 75% of oropharyngeal cancers, 75% of vaginal cancers, 70% of vulvar cancers, and 60% of penile cancers.2 Low-risk or non-oncogenic genotypes (eg, types 6 and 11) cause anogenital warts, low-grade cervical disease, and recurrent respiratory papillomatosis. In the USA, the incidence of oropharyngeal cancer in men now exceeds that of cervical cancer in women, and by 2020 the annual number of HPV-associated oropharyngeal cancers will exceed that of cervical cancers. As a result, it is important to consider ways to expand our HPV prevention efforts to boys and men.
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6...
If I were 10-ish years younger, I wouldn't have gotten cancer. I was likely exposed to HPV in my early to mid 20s, where it hid in my tonsils for decades.
In the US, almost anyone under 45 can get vaccinated. Please do. As another comment points out, they protect against multiple strains. It's unlikely you've been exposed to all of them.
While HPV+ head and neck cancers are more easily and more successfully treated than HPV- ones, I do not recommend getting cancer.
From the outside, I look like a normal person of late middle age. The two incision scars I have look like neck folds -- literally no one, including medical personnel outside of the cancer world, notices them.
From the inside, tho:
* Can no longer taste sugar, salt, chocolate, and a host of other, smaller things. Most other things have less taste and pretty much nothing has a flavor after a few bites. For some, this eventually stops -- I'm unlucky. (Radiation destruction of taste buds)
* Significantly decreased saliva to the throat. Cannot eat without some liquid. The saliva that forms is thicker and sometimes causes problems swallowing. Some get this to the mouth and to a larger extreme -- I'm lucky. (Radiation)
* Dental trauma, including teeth extraction / root canal / deep fillings, may cause spontaneous bone tissue death in the jaw. (Radiation)
* Permanent sensation of partial numbness centered around my left ear and cheek. Touching that area produces a pins and needles sensation. (Neck dissection)
* No feeling in a stripe about 1.5" (4cm) wide where the neck dissection scars are. (Neck dissection)
* Changes in speech quality. These are not clinically significant but changed my voice from one people enjoyed listening to (asked to do voice over work, complemented, etc) to just another voice. (Surgery)
* Tinnitus increased significantly and hearing has worsened. I was not given chemo, the normal cause of hearing loss. (Unsure cause)
There's more, but those are some of the highlights. Get vaccinated, get your kids vaccinated, etc.
HPV- head and neck cancers in the US are dropping as people quit smoking. HPV+ are on the rise for now, but will drop as the generations with vaccinations get older.
I'm traveling today, but will look at this later today if anyone has a question to ask.
Congratulations on surviving!
Keyboard warriors don’t need to think about pain, suffering, and misery.
Can confirm radiation is brutal and almost indescribable. Everything tasted bitter and sulfurous for 6 months, even water. I had a feeding tube placed after not eating for 3 weeks and losing 25% of my body weight (roughly 35 pounds). I was days away from death. I would wake up every night with blood pouring out of my nose and was not able to open my jaw for almost a week. 2 years later, after many iterations of lymphedema, physical and speech therapy I am still in significant pain every day and cannot even swallow my own spit unless I am on narcotics around the clock. That in itself is a nightmare because finding a provider that will prescribe a steady supply of narcotics instead of pushing expensive procedures so they can get rich is difficult. I am routinely drug tested so I can get medications that prevent me from starving to death. It is humiliating.
I am lucky in that my speech is virtually the same as before treatment which is rare, and my taste has returned to normal. I would die of starvation without narcotics and I don't know if I will ever gain the energy and stamina to have children, and yet I still consider myself extremely well off compared to other survivors.
Please get vaccinated for HPV and lower your risk factors for oral cancer in general. It is one of the worst late stage cancers to recover from. You may be alive after the treatments but radiation will destroy your quality of life and you will likely be dependent on doctors for basic tasks for a long time, if not the rest of your existence. I don't want to think about what my life will be like if my cancer ever returns.
Can you expand on this ?
Why can't people over the age of 45 be vaccinated ?
Is that restriction "on label" ?
Whether this is useful depends. HPV 16 and 18 are the "high risk" strains most associated with cancer. Depending on your sexual history, getting vaccinated at 45+ may be useful. Unfortunately, there's no reliable test for HPV 16 and 18 for those who have already had it.
https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vpd/hpv/hcp/recommendations.htm...
Vaccines are one of the most amazing inventions. The fact that they can eradicate entire categories of diseases and save so many people from suffering and death with such a simple intervention, is truly remarkable.
It makes me very sad that as a society we are failing to simply take what's there. Maybe the biggest flaw of vaccines is that they are so effective that people don't remember how bad these diseases really were, and only know the minor side effects.
Feeling bad for a couple of days instead of getting certain cancers, measles, hepatitis, and many other serious diseases is a great fucking deal. Also had almost no side effects from the hpv vaccine, 10/10 do recommend.
He also invented the pasteurization process, which has saved countless lives. Now we have a whole anti-pasteurization movement, because why not. Wild that education has failed so hard that we have large numbers turning their backs on these blessings we're fortunate enough to take for granted.
Actually, in the USA it's a financial catastrophe if you're uninsured and of average means. You're looking at a $7,000 expense. Or you could spend like $1,000 on a ticket to Thailand or something and get it there for $70.
Source: https://www.thaitravelclinic.com/cost.html
I have first hand experience at this clinic. It is part of an excellent medical school in Bangkok.
Sure, and so are NSAIDs, but I'm still not taking Rofecoxib (Vioxx).
It's not that hard to avoid a drug withdrawn from the market 20 years ago though ..
Not sure what point you are trying to make with a banned medicine that causes heart problems. (Most) vaccines are proven to be incredibly safe, they are likely one of the most researched and rigorously tested medical interventions we have. If certain vaccines would have effects like Rofecoxib they would get banned as well (likely before reaching the public), that's how this works..
To what extent can it be transmitted via "touching"? And other mechanisms since it says "especially" implying there might be others.
As a man approaching 40 I've never considered this vaccine because I've only ever been (and ever will be) sexually active in any way with my wife, who has been the same with me. Is there any reason to get the vaccine in my situation? I see a lot of comments here that we all should get it, but if it's just sexually transmitted I don't think there's a reason for me to.
Certain types of HPV are more associated with certain lesions over others, but the broad range of HPV targets means that dangerous HPV types could be transmitted through relatively innocuous means.
Some context: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK448132/
I see you're calling a vaccine a "vaccine". Noted.
It lost effectiveness against delta and then became nearly ineffective against Omicron (although still helping with reduction of hospitalizations and deaths).
Non-mRNA vaccine is available now (Novavax) and the effectiveness, or lack thereof, seems similar.
[0] https://med.stanford.edu/news/all-news/2021/07/vaccination-a...
It does seem wise to preferentially get the Pfizer boosters over the Moderna boosters for lower dosage though, particularly if you're a young man.
"It is now clear for men <40, dose 2 and dose 3 of Pfizer have more myocarditis than sars-cov-2 infection, and this is true for dose 1 and dose 2 of Moderna."
If you want to say your subjective group is self evidently better off with some option, then don't say you are making a scientific argument.
Unless there is some unknown, long term effect from COVID that is yet to manifest itself, it is self-evident that the comment that "It was also more dangerous to healthy young men than just getting COVID, due to myocarditis." is "Absolutely not true" is incorrect.
I can't find age-breakdown data of which specific complication causes the most death in COVID patients, but for the population broadly, it is multiple organ failure, then pneumonia and related pulmonary problems. Not myocarditis.
So if you're excluding the primary causes of death of COVID then sure, the tradeoff gets a lot less clear.
Effectively zero for healthy men under 40.
I do think common sense needs to play a part in your risk assessment.
The IFR for men between 35-39 is five and half times higher than that.
I wouldn’t mind common sense, but in lieu of that, some basic numeracy would be helpful.
For healthy men?
Not all vaccines are equally effective, but none of them are 100% effective at preventing infections. The only thing vaccines do is prepare the immune system for an infection. Since SARS-CoV-2 mutations happen a lot faster than (for example) measles, Covid vaccines are a lot less effective - by the time you're infected, the infection is dissimilar enough to what the immune system was prepared for that the preparation is no longer optimal.
Or maybe you are, since you used scare quotes. It's probably too late to share any facts with you at this point...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_animals_that_can_get_S...
There was this strange determination at the time, from every media and government outlet, not to accept that having had covid was as (or more) effective than taking the vaccine. And also not to accept that mass lockdowns were destructive. My grandfather was a victim of the lockdowns (as one of the many with vascular dementia who were kept going by being stimulated by family.) After 93 years of raising a family, he got to die alone, confused and isolated.
edit: it's all of the authoritative disinformation during covid that's threatening cervical cancer vaccination. It brought the thoroughly discredited anti-vaxxers of yore back into the (numerical) mainstream, and respected as heroes (JFK, Jr. for one example.) Wakefield's paper is just as stupid as it ever was, but now you will never convince the majority of Americans that vaccines don't cause autism. The Lancet is trash.
We sort of did do that because of how much policies varied from state to state and even from county to county or city to city within a state. For nearly any aspect of of pandemic response it is possible to find demographically similar counties that differed on that particular are and compare outcomes.
It would greatly reduce other types of cancer too. Men also benefit from it. Unfortunately the way campaigns market it causes many people to think it benefits ladies only.
A cursory understanding of the virus, insurance, and the age bounding of getting vaccinated would lead anyone to the same conclusion. Unless they are allergic to the word “vaccine”.
Basically, the vaccines dont work with prior exposure, and there is no test to know if men have been exposed. So thats why there is no focus on men, and why initially men were only approved for use if they were under 26 years old, based purely on probabilities they havent been exposed yet. This is a problem for insurance companies.
Also at one point in time, it wasnt linked to cancers affecting men, and men were seen only as carriers. Now it seems any area of flesh exposed to HPV strains are at risk of cancer there.
The age of male coverage has been expanded to like mid-40s by now.
The abstinence crowd worried about anything that makes people feel safer engaging in sex will get you killed.
The vaccine (Gardasil) protects against 9 strains. Even if you've been exposed to 1 strain, it protects against the other 8 strains.
>Also at one point in time, it wasnt linked to cancers affecting men, and men were seen only as carriers. Now it seems any area of flesh exposed to HPV strains are at risk of cancer there.
Even if it didn't do anything in men, it's stupid not to vaccinate as many people as possible to get herd immunity. We understand this for a hundred years now with other vaccines, why not this one?
Apart from that it's not a bad guess to think that if it causes one cancer it will be causing other types of cancer as well. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
>The age of male coverage has been expanded to like mid-40s by now.
Sadly in Germany it's still only for younger men. And older men weren't offered the vaccine at all when they were younger, so they never got the offer. I paid out of pocket for it, but it's still stupid that we're still putting a part of the population at unnecessary risk for cancer, and also decreasing herd immunity at the same time.
Lack of HPV vaccination is just a symptom of lack of understanding of science and statistics in politics.
At some point it stops being about science or understanding and starts being wholly about politics. There's a lot more "well these demographics or institutions f-ing hate me so I'm sure as shit not taking their word for anything" going around than there was a decade ago.
This would be fine. It goes further: not only rejecting the institutions, but concluding adversely based on their advocating for something.
180€ per injection. The normal schedule is 3 injections. (first, 1 month, 6 month). However I checked and NHS (UK) did a study on it that showed a single injection provides the same protection as 3, so they changed their injection schedule to single injection for people under 25, and 2 injections (first + 6-24 months) for over 25s due to the expectation that older immune systems take longer to adapt.
The German (StIKo) recommendation is still 3, but I prefer listening to the NHS here because they have been more scientific about this in the past and seem to be actively studying this stuff.
I asked my doctor and they said I can pick the schedule I want, since it's not insured anyway. So I picked the two injection schedule. So that makes 360€ for me. If the NHS study holds you could probably pick a single injection and already have most or all of the protection. I picked two because I figured it's still recommended for my age group that way.
>And the doctors say there isn't much point because I've probably been exposed already (considering number of partners that's likely).
My doctor said the same, but the NHS says it's still useful from their studies. Especially since Gardasil protects against 9 variants. It's unlikely you've been exposed to all 9 variants.
I am not a doctor, so I can only tell you what I've found helpful in making my decision.
I forgot to link the sources the 9-valent vaccine is the current Gardasil:
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/single-dose-of-hp...
Some people you just can't reach. I stopped arguing at that point.
The FDA recommends it for males under 45 now. It does prevent infection from new exposures. In time I bet that we will find it reduces cancer incidence even in those infected before vaccination. Those studies will take years to complete and it is too early to tell.
When the vaccine was first available, it was rationed, and the highest priority was for young girls before they become sexually active since they have the highest benefit.
This is a beef I have with a lot of medical thinking: that if it doesn't work it would be bad to do it. But that's not true at all - many things are good to do, if there is some chance it will help, even if most of the time it does nothing. You do have to weigh other negatives like cost, pain, hassle, or unknown side effects.
But in general - if it might make me better and won't make me worse - then sign me up!
At 200€ a time (plus administration costs, plus lost work hours of those you're injecting), for millions of people that's also a lot of wasted funds that could be put into medicines that are known to be effective for the people they're treating.
Why, for medicines that are highly available, that a doctor considers to be low risk, a sane adult can't just elect to pay for and take a medicine, that I am not sure of.
I agree that we don't want all of society to be collectively paying for something that has large, clear costs, but dubious efficacy. Then again, COVID...
The big push lately has been to get kids vaccinated before they are teens, which mine (all males) were.
I have not had this vaccine, but at my age and being married any new sexual contacts are pretty unlikely so not sure there's any benefit to me either way.
My doctor recommended it to me and it was covered by insurance. They said while it cannot protect you from previous exposure it’s pretty wide so it’s unlikely I have yet to encounter every HPV variation it protects against.
> The CDC suggests catch-up HPV vaccinations for all people through age 26 who aren't fully vaccinated.
> The FDA approved the use of Gardasil 9 for males and females ages 9 to 45.
https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/hpv-infection...
> HPV vaccine is recommended for routine vaccination at age 11 or 12 years. (Vaccination can be started at age 9.)
> ACIP also recommends vaccination for everyone through age 26 years if not adequately vaccinated when younger. HPV vaccination is given as a series of either two or three doses, depending on age at initial vaccination.
https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vpd/hpv/hcp/recommendations.htm...
You have to bring it up to the doctor yourself though.
I was going to be traveling overseas, and was worried it would be required by a foreign country. I wanted all vaccines handled by my American GP, so the records would be in one place. I was very insistent: "Give me every vaccine for every country."
He said if I wanted the vaccine that bad, I'd have to get it overseas.
In looking at the little pharmacy receipt they give you, there's certainly a prescription number, and a note that says "DR. AUTH REQUIRED" and at the top of the printout there's a field for "DOCTOR" but no value (like there is for "PATIENT"). I guess I have a question for next year, if I can remember!
https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/fda-appr...
The extent to which these vaccines would be helpful to mean is usually to avoid hurting women. Which is not minor at all, I would definitely get one for that reason alone. But I wouldn't be concerned for personal risks.
That's a pretty diplomatic way to say that they pretty much don't care about men being affected. In my region the vaccine is free for women but men have to pay despite >40% of cancers caused being in men and nobody even informs you of that.
Over here they claim HPV is the leading cause of throat cancer (not smoking) - https://www.cdc.gov/cancer/hpv/basic-information.html
Over here is the leading cause of cervical cancers world wide - https://www.cancer.gov/types/cervical/causes-risk-prevention
Then over here:
> Cervical cancer incidence rates decreased by more than half from the mid-1970s to the mid-2000s … in women ages 30-44, rates have increased 1.7% each year from 2012 to 2019.
> Cervical cancer was once one of the most common causes of cancer death for American women. The cervical cancer death rate has dropped by more than half since the mid-1970s
https://www.cancer.org/cancer/types/cervical-cancer/about/ke...
A vaccine for HPV became available in 2006 — https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/HPV_vaccine
So it seems cancer has increased since the introduction of the vaccine. Prior to that it was decreasing.
Further, after reading about HPV generally, there’s no symptoms typically and most forms are not the cancer causing kind. Only certain HPV strains combined with a long term infection (if they estimate 20 years) cause cancer.
IMO there’s a lot of correlation with frankly minimal and confusing causation. Combined with evidence the vaccines aren’t effective at changing the cancer rates at all, seems like a money grab by big pharma to me. “Get vaccinated to avoid this cancer you’re highly unlikely to get and won’t know if you do for 20 years” seems like a stretch…
In before confounding factors OK fine. do the placebo controlled trial.
Anti-vaxxers also sometimes object to studies like these on the basis that no placebo arm was included, and thus the true safety profile of the vaccine cannot be ascertained, but this can be flatly rejected because, as the study authors point out, '[s]ince HPV vaccination is widely recommended and has been shown to prevent HPV disease related to oncogenic HPV types, the use of a placebo was not considered to be acceptable for ethical reasons.'
I had Hodgkins Lymphoma (many years ago now when I was young) and we've been treating that for so long that the earliest curative treatments pre-date scientific medicine. So the trail dries up - we have no proof that the cures are better than nothing except, you know, circumstantially it sure does seem like the freaks who reject treatment just drop dead and I didn't so...
They're still doing research, as with the HPV vaccines they do A v B trials as a placebo would be unethical - it's basically a death sentence. I actually wasn't selected for a trial comparing Stanford V (a new potential therapy from Stanford) against the current gold standard (which I was getting) ABVD. That was a long time ago, but I think the gold standard today is still ABVD.
Or you can eliminate it by vaccination and avoid the suffering and risk.
Similarly, while there may be ethical concerns with using a placebo, statistics and biology do not care about ethical concerns. There are real results which come from medical treatments, and ignoring them does not make them go away; it just makes us ignorant of them.
> None of the deaths were considered by the study investigators to be vaccine-related. The five deaths in the 9vHPV vaccine group were the result of suicide (15 days after vaccination dose 1), acute lymphocytic leukemia (diagnosed 27 days after vaccination dose 3), traffic accident (226 days after vaccination dose 3), hypovolemic shock and septic shock (531 days after vaccination dose 3), and sudden death (678 days after vaccination dose 3). The five deaths in the qHPV vaccine group were the result of accidental death (airplane accident 7 days after vaccination dose 3), spinal cord injury (141 days after vaccination dose 3), gastric adenocarcinoma (diagnosed 403 days after vaccination dose 3), cervical spinal cord injury (811 days after vaccination dose 3), and cerebral hemorrhage (1114 days after vaccination dose 3).
For example, you might be tempted to dismiss deaths due to traffic accidents as being obviously unrelated to a drug. However, if there were a lot of them, it would be prudent to check for potential effects on reaction times or judgement.
The same bullshit reason they used to not do a controlled trial for COVID-19 vaccines. That's pseudo science.
I can't prove the efficacy and the safety so let me find a reason to remove any form of control to make more money and avoid class action lawsuits. The heath agencies have been completed hijacked.
This reason can also be used to cover up the side effects of the vaccine/drug. Complete BS.