Slog
News & ArtsWednesday, October 21, 2009
Health / Sex Vaccinate Boys Against HPV
Posted by Dan Savage on Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 7:33 AM
Writing on Slate last week William Saletan took apart a study by the British Medical Journal that came out against vaccinating boys for HPV, the human papillomavirus. The vaccine is effective and targets strains of HPV that can cause cervical cancer in women. While nutters on the right are still debating the HPV vaccine—they vaccine undermines their abstinence message (message: SECKS WILL KILLS YOU!)—sensible people are urged to vaccinate their daughters at age 11, because it's crucial that the vaccination take place "before they become sexually active." Since the virus is so common, and since it is spread by skin-to-skin contact, girls can contract the virus through relatively innocent and seemingly low-stakes adolescent sexual exploration. You don't have to be having full-on vaginal intercourse to contract HPV.
Back to Saletan:
Why vaccinate girls but not boys? The authors [of the study] cite several factors. First, HPV is more likely to harm girls. Second, the vaccine is more effective in girls. Third, the rate of viral transmission depends on the virus's prevalence "in the opposite sex at any given time." If girls are routinely vaccinated, there's nothing for boys to catch or transmit.In other words, boys don't have to get vaccinated for the same reason they don't have to wash dishes, do laundry, buy birth control, or think about other people in general: Girls will do it for them.
Why do HPV vaccines work better in girls than in boys? Because they were designed for and tested in girls. It's true that HPV affects girls more than boys, but the same can be said of pregnancy. There's still a male in the equation somewhere. Boys certainly share the pleasure. Why not share the responsibility?
The study's authors do allow that one group of men should receive the vaccine:
The authors of the BMJ paper concede that they "only represented heterosexual partnerships and therefore did not reflect HPV transmission among men who have sex with men, who face a high risk of anal cancer and may realise a greater benefit from HPV vaccination." But the argument for vaccinating gay men isn't just that they might benefit. It's that vaccinating women won't help them. They can't count on somebody else to take care of the problem.
But if you want to vaccinate gay men against HPV—because women can't do it for us—you have to vaccinate gay men well before we become sexually active, same as girls. Age 11, remember? And since we don't know at age 11 which boys are going to be gay when they grow up, you have to vaccinate all boys against HPV in order to protect the ones who are going to be gay when they grow up. It seems like a no-brainer and a win-win: vaccinating all boys against HPV will protect the gays ones—gay men are 17 times more likely to develop anal cancer as adults—and help protect girls and women from the deadlier strains of HPV. It would also offer some protection to girls whose parents denied them the vaccine for batshitcrazy religious reasons. That's a win-win-win.
Last week the FDA approved the HPV vaccine for men and boys. The CDC will decide today whether to recommend HPV vaccinations for boys. They should.
1
Why are anal cancer and penile cancers much more common in gay men than they are in heterosexual men?
Why are gay men 17 times more likely to develop anal cancer than heterosexual men?
Why are gay men 17 times more likely to develop anal cancer than heterosexual men?
2
1, For the same reason heterosexual women get cervical cancer.
The vaccine is a good idea. Time to put the shame, guilt, and mythology aside.
The vaccine is a good idea. Time to put the shame, guilt, and mythology aside.
3
Dr. Selma Dritz wrote in the New England Journal of Medicine, "Oral and Anal intercourse present physicians with surgical as well as medical problems, ranging from anal fissures and impaction of foreign bodies in the rectum to major diagnostic dilemmas." Dr. Marlys Witte et al. noted in The International Journal of Dermatology, that homosexual male practices such as "receptive anal and oral intercourse and oral-anal contact, recurrent rectal trauma associated with 'fisting,'" and venereal and parasitic infections, lead to many medical problems including tissue inflammation, "... intense angiogenesis, and progressive fibrosis." And Dr. Christina M. Surawicz et al. noted Homosexually active men have frequent intestinal and rectal symptoms resulting from sexually acquired gastrointestinal infections."
6
According to Dr. Steven Wexner of the Cleveland Clinic in Ft. Lauderdale, Florida, "Up to 55 percent of homosexual men with anorectal complaints have gonorrhea; 80 percent of the patients with syphilis are homosexuals," he wrote. "Chlamydia is found in 15 percent of asymptomatic homosexual men, and up to one third of homosexuals have active anorectal herpes simplex virus." He went on to point out, "In addition, a host of parasites, bacterial, viral, and protozoan are rampant in the homosexual population."
8
Is the fact that are gay men 17 times more likely to develop anal cancer than heterosexual men also from anti gay hate sites?
9
Yes, yes, and yes, Dan. Vaccination of XYs is long overdue, and you are absolutely right: it needs to be done before puberty. This virus is so wickedly infectious that if we wait for teen boys to figure it out, identify as gay or bi, and self-refer for vaccination, we will protect absolutely no one.
On the other hand I do think you should give a nod to the ethics of the situation. The push was for girls to get vaccinated because they were the ones at risk for cervical, vaginal, and vulvar cancer, often at young ages and in numbers all out of proportion to the anal cancers seen in gay men. In public health, you typically start by vaccinating the group that stands to benefit most, and then widen your target to include the larger population. This was the same thing the CDC did with the Hep B vaccines, targeting gay men and healthcare workers first. As you know, every kid gets vaccinated for Hep B now, or they don't get into middle school. And no one blinks. With any luck, we'll see a similar development with HPV.
On the other hand I do think you should give a nod to the ethics of the situation. The push was for girls to get vaccinated because they were the ones at risk for cervical, vaginal, and vulvar cancer, often at young ages and in numbers all out of proportion to the anal cancers seen in gay men. In public health, you typically start by vaccinating the group that stands to benefit most, and then widen your target to include the larger population. This was the same thing the CDC did with the Hep B vaccines, targeting gay men and healthcare workers first. As you know, every kid gets vaccinated for Hep B now, or they don't get into middle school. And no one blinks. With any luck, we'll see a similar development with HPV.
11
1, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, please get a job where you can't diddle your computer. I wouldn't want you to get a virus.
12
Despite the evidence of the unhealthy nature of some homosexual behavior, medical doctors usually take the politically correct view of the gay lifestyle. A doctor treating a heart patient would urge him to stay away from fatty foods. A doctor treating a patient for diabetes would urge him to improve his diet. But instead of urging patients to abstain from dangerous sexual behavior, many doctors have encouraged patients to continue the unhealthy behavior as long as they take precautions that are proven to be inadequate.
Not all doctors subscribe to this conventional wisdom. A study appearing in the Journal of the American Medical Association concluded that homosexuals should use condoms to protect against the transmission of hepatitis B. Dr. Ralph H. Harder wrote to the journal, "I worry about the loss of objectivity and of scientific approach in current research, at least in dealing with certain sacred subjects. . . . A much more valid and useful conclusion, it would seem, is that anal insertive intercourse is inherently dangerous and should be proscribed."
Not all doctors subscribe to this conventional wisdom. A study appearing in the Journal of the American Medical Association concluded that homosexuals should use condoms to protect against the transmission of hepatitis B. Dr. Ralph H. Harder wrote to the journal, "I worry about the loss of objectivity and of scientific approach in current research, at least in dealing with certain sacred subjects. . . . A much more valid and useful conclusion, it would seem, is that anal insertive intercourse is inherently dangerous and should be proscribed."
13
Lesbians who have never had sex with a man have an 84% reduced risk of cervical cancer. That must means god hates heterosexuals, right?
14
BTW, 3, your quote from Selma Dritz is DECADES old, and she would find your use of it to bash gay men despicable, except that she has been dead for some time. Dr. Dritz was one of the great heroines of the early AIDS epidemic, lovingly known as "den mother of the gays." She understood, as you obviously do not, the difference between public health and morality.
16
Another ancient quote, 12! Perhaps you should pool your money with 1, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8 and subscribe to some medical journals that aren't 30 years old, because that's how long it's been since we've had an effective vaccine against Hep B.
Sheesh!
Sheesh!
17
yeah, but 15, I'm having a good time here! It seems to be the same guy, and he is so VERY lame....only problem is I actually have to go to work and stamp out disease pretty soon. Most of what I see is of the het-acquired variety, 'tho. Those lezzies just don't seem to pass stuff around.
19
17
What are the behaviors that cause homosexual men to have anal cancer at 17 times the rate in control groups?
What would the good Doctor recommend?
What are the behaviors that cause homosexual men to have anal cancer at 17 times the rate in control groups?
What would the good Doctor recommend?
21
@14
@16
Old stuff.
out of date-
we've come sooo far!
Homosexual men account for 59% of new AIDS cases.
Good Work, Doc!!
@16
Old stuff.
out of date-
we've come sooo far!
Homosexual men account for 59% of new AIDS cases.
Good Work, Doc!!
22
I worry about the loss of objectivity and of scientific approach in dealing with certain sacred subjects... A much more valid and useful conclusion, it would seem, is that vaginal insertive sex is inherently dangerous and should be proscribed.
23
@Trolls - You know what other voluntary activity poses massive health risks? Driving a car. Wildly more risky than anal sex, yet I would guess very few doctors are advocating that patients abstain from driving.
The lesson (not that you've shown any capacity for learning) is that a doctor's job is to advise people of the risks of their behavior, if known, and treat the results should someone choose to engage in that behavior anyway. We all choose to engage in countless behaviors that have serious health risks—some have easy, realistic alternatives (eat better), some don't (fall in love with someone else).
Do you consider people who eat fatty foods to be immoral and unworthy of health care? You really want to take your arguments to their logical conclusion and apply them universally? Of course not. You just want to apply them to people who aren't like you.
There's a name for people like that. Bigots.
The lesson (not that you've shown any capacity for learning) is that a doctor's job is to advise people of the risks of their behavior, if known, and treat the results should someone choose to engage in that behavior anyway. We all choose to engage in countless behaviors that have serious health risks—some have easy, realistic alternatives (eat better), some don't (fall in love with someone else).
Do you consider people who eat fatty foods to be immoral and unworthy of health care? You really want to take your arguments to their logical conclusion and apply them universally? Of course not. You just want to apply them to people who aren't like you.
There's a name for people like that. Bigots.
24
5
Who is the hater?
Someone who recognizes that some behaviors are very unhealthy and advocates education so people can keep themselves safe
or
someone who pats you on the head and says 'go ahead, whatever...' and blames AIDS on Reagan and the Fundies?
Who is the hater?
Someone who recognizes that some behaviors are very unhealthy and advocates education so people can keep themselves safe
or
someone who pats you on the head and says 'go ahead, whatever...' and blames AIDS on Reagan and the Fundies?
25
Why Mr Troll @19, she recommends that everyone get vaccinated for HPV. Weren't you paying attention? Perhaps we should have a little chat after class? Right now, you're failing big-time.
And @20, if bad behavior were punished you'd be off this site.....and I'd be having a much duller morning.
And @20, if bad behavior were punished you'd be off this site.....and I'd be having a much duller morning.
26
18 & 19 - Yes. Factually incorrect until you show you work. Site your studies and your evidence from an accredited, well-respected, peer-reviewed medical journal, or you get a big fat "F".
17 - I think it proves that God is really a straight man, because straight men just love lesbians.
17 - I think it proves that God is really a straight man, because straight men just love lesbians.
28
Yeah, this is long overdue. It would also end the problem of HPV for everyone much faster if EVERYONE was vaccinated.
29
My gynecologist, a woman, made sure her teenage son got the HPV vaccine for precisely this reason - she wanted to make sure that he didn't give any women cervical cancer. She didn't see it as women's responsibility alone to protect themselves from HPV.
Now, if only the vaccine worked against all strains instead of just 4 of them, 2 high-risk (cancer causing) and 2 low-risk (wart causing), we'd be well set. Unfortunately, the "less common" strains will probably just become more common once these 4 strains are routinely vaccinated against.
Now, if only the vaccine worked against all strains instead of just 4 of them, 2 high-risk (cancer causing) and 2 low-risk (wart causing), we'd be well set. Unfortunately, the "less common" strains will probably just become more common once these 4 strains are routinely vaccinated against.
30
It's about darn time. My daughter was done at 11, and I want my son done as well. Every child deserves to be protected.
31
True story---my daughters, then 9 and 13 were the first in our facility to get vaccinated for HPV. I will never forget the pair of them sitting in their pediatrician's office, crying because I was absolutely adamant that they get the shot. "Please don't make us get a shot," the oldest one said. "We PROMISE we'll never have sex!"
32
Anyone go on and read that FDA article? Basically they say "why should we bother vaccinating boys when the virus only kills a few thousand women a year". Oh look at that. You can comment on FDA articles. Hmmmmmmmm
http://www.foodconsumer.org/newsite/Non-…
http://www.foodconsumer.org/newsite/Non-…
33
25
If your patients get vaccinated for HPV and do not change their behavior what other diseases will they be at risk for? Will the HPV vaccine prevent AIDS? Venereal disease? The Doctors advice is woefully inadequate and/or criminally negligent.
If your patients get vaccinated for HPV and do not change their behavior what other diseases will they be at risk for? Will the HPV vaccine prevent AIDS? Venereal disease? The Doctors advice is woefully inadequate and/or criminally negligent.
34
9: "This was the same thing the CDC did with the Hep B vaccines, targeting gay men and healthcare workers first. As you know, every kid gets vaccinated for Hep B now, or they don't get into middle school. And no one blinks. With any luck, we'll see a similar development with HPV."
I hope so!
I think it's just ridiculous that only girls are being vaccinated. WTF? I'm happy to hear that the vaccine has been approved for men and boys, though. I hope they decide to recommend the HPV vaccine for them. For straight guys, wouldn't you want to protect yourself--and therefore protect your future partner, wife, girlfriend, whatever? What would be nice is a reliable test for guys, though. I got diagnosed with HPV last May, and whatever guy gave it to me (Not that I was sleeping with tons of people--the opposite is more like it)--there's no test for them to even know they're passing it around, and it makes me really angry. (Oh, and I did get the vaccine, but I must have aquired HPV after being tested, but before receiving the shot that would have protected me from that specific strain. For those that don't know, there are three rounds that take place over a period of months.)
What I wonder is, what about women who have anal sex and find out they have HPV? Are they more likely to get anal cancer? I have dysplasia of the cervix, but I'm too embarrased to ask my doc is there's anything funky going on in my behind. *ahem* What about oral sex and HPV? That can lead to throat/mouth cancers, right? And who doesn't give oral? So why don't they check your throat for odd cells? Could somebody help me out here? It's been making me nervous for a while. If you have problems from HPV in one spot (Cervix), why can't you have problems from it in another spot (Ass or throat)?
More...
I hope so!
I think it's just ridiculous that only girls are being vaccinated. WTF? I'm happy to hear that the vaccine has been approved for men and boys, though. I hope they decide to recommend the HPV vaccine for them. For straight guys, wouldn't you want to protect yourself--and therefore protect your future partner, wife, girlfriend, whatever? What would be nice is a reliable test for guys, though. I got diagnosed with HPV last May, and whatever guy gave it to me (Not that I was sleeping with tons of people--the opposite is more like it)--there's no test for them to even know they're passing it around, and it makes me really angry. (Oh, and I did get the vaccine, but I must have aquired HPV after being tested, but before receiving the shot that would have protected me from that specific strain. For those that don't know, there are three rounds that take place over a period of months.)
What I wonder is, what about women who have anal sex and find out they have HPV? Are they more likely to get anal cancer? I have dysplasia of the cervix, but I'm too embarrased to ask my doc is there's anything funky going on in my behind. *ahem* What about oral sex and HPV? That can lead to throat/mouth cancers, right? And who doesn't give oral? So why don't they check your throat for odd cells? Could somebody help me out here? It's been making me nervous for a while. If you have problems from HPV in one spot (Cervix), why can't you have problems from it in another spot (Ass or throat)?
35
@ 31,
My daughter said the same, with the first shot but was silent with the remaining two. Then again, my son who has asthma as promised not to get the flu to avoid a flu shot.
My daughter said the same, with the first shot but was silent with the remaining two. Then again, my son who has asthma as promised not to get the flu to avoid a flu shot.
36
I heard that there are preliminary studies that are linking HPV and prostate cancer. Now how does everyone feel about the vaccine?
37
Only problem is that the vaccine only prevents some strains of HPV infection. Once you knock out that strain, it's possible a more virulent strain will take its place since it just won the evolutionary competition thanks to modern medicine. (This has already happened with the childhood vaccine Prevnar.)
Getting the vaccine will not prevent all cancers, just the ones caused by the strains the vaccine includes. And the ones that take their place could be worse that the originals.
Vaccines often work, but they are not magic.
Getting the vaccine will not prevent all cancers, just the ones caused by the strains the vaccine includes. And the ones that take their place could be worse that the originals.
Vaccines often work, but they are not magic.
38
@33: HPV *is* a venereal disease, you moron. Venereal disease = sexually transmitted disease (STD) = sexually transmitted infection. Same concept, different names.
39
I forgot to add. . .
"For straight guys, wouldn't you want to protect yourself--and therefore protect your future partner, wife, girlfriend, whatever?"
... and not only that, but it's not like guys go unaffected, either. It's more likely to cause harm in women, true, but guys aren't immune to the effects. That's why it's so mind boggling that they'd say it's just a woman's problem (and if it is, and we're just talking about straight folks, then it's a woman's problem given to them by the men in their lives). That's what my boyfriend's doctor said when he asked about it--"It's a woman's problem. Don't worry about it." What-the-f*cking-f*ck?!?!?!)
"For straight guys, wouldn't you want to protect yourself--and therefore protect your future partner, wife, girlfriend, whatever?"
... and not only that, but it's not like guys go unaffected, either. It's more likely to cause harm in women, true, but guys aren't immune to the effects. That's why it's so mind boggling that they'd say it's just a woman's problem (and if it is, and we're just talking about straight folks, then it's a woman's problem given to them by the men in their lives). That's what my boyfriend's doctor said when he asked about it--"It's a woman's problem. Don't worry about it." What-the-f*cking-f*ck?!?!?!)
40
This is not feasible without overstepping the line that divides health care and propaganda of an ideology. This is could well be construed as another method of indoctrination of loose sexual behavior in girls at a young age and normalizing same sex acts in the minds of boys. The age at which some would like this to be implemented posses a problem, it is at this age when responsible parents teach their kids their moral values and life affirming beliefs. To have an outsider come and say look we need to give you this in case you decide to have sex outside of marriage or in the case of boys, we need to give you this in case you want to "experiment" with other boys and engage in sodomy, would constitute a total infringement on the rights of responsible parents to educate and bring into adulthood their kids with the values and morals standards that they have deemed appropriate.
41
33, I have definitely written you off for the rest of the class. I suggest you find another career, preferably one that does not tax your limited mental faculties too much --- "venereal disease" simply means a sexually acquired illness, so AIDS is simply one of the class. On the other hand, most "venereal diseases" can be transmitted through non-sexual means. Epic fail!
34, many men who have HPV have it inside the urethra where it can't be detected casually and provides an unfortunate reservoir to seed the ejaculate. That's probably how you got infected. All your other questions are perfectly appropriate, and have answers. PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE talk to your doctor. Trust me, she has seen it all before.
34, many men who have HPV have it inside the urethra where it can't be detected casually and provides an unfortunate reservoir to seed the ejaculate. That's probably how you got infected. All your other questions are perfectly appropriate, and have answers. PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE talk to your doctor. Trust me, she has seen it all before.
42
34
Your questions are insightful ones.
Political correctness frightens health care providers from providing frank accurate useful information on sexual behavior.
Some behaviors are inherently unsafe and unhealthy.
Condoms mitigate but in no way eliminate the risks.
Unless the core behaviors are addressed even when treatments for particular strains and conditions are developed others will instantly rise up to take their place.
As @29 notes, even if everyone is vaccinated for these 4 strains, if behavior doesn't change (and especially if behavior becomes more risky because people have a false sense of security) new even more virulent strains will quickly arise.
Current practice is a game of "Whack-a-Mole" where, as soon as one disease is addressed, a new one (or two, or five...) pop up.
A better approach would be to unplug the machine and stop the moles at their source, by educating people on what behaviors are unsafe and best avoided.
Your questions are insightful ones.
Political correctness frightens health care providers from providing frank accurate useful information on sexual behavior.
Some behaviors are inherently unsafe and unhealthy.
Condoms mitigate but in no way eliminate the risks.
Unless the core behaviors are addressed even when treatments for particular strains and conditions are developed others will instantly rise up to take their place.
As @29 notes, even if everyone is vaccinated for these 4 strains, if behavior doesn't change (and especially if behavior becomes more risky because people have a false sense of security) new even more virulent strains will quickly arise.
Current practice is a game of "Whack-a-Mole" where, as soon as one disease is addressed, a new one (or two, or five...) pop up.
A better approach would be to unplug the machine and stop the moles at their source, by educating people on what behaviors are unsafe and best avoided.
43
OK, OK, OK, I GOT TO GO TO WORK, but Loveschild @40 you are so VERY provoking. Many of the cases of HPV I see were acquired by young women who were abstinent until marriage, but their new husbands were not. So, because you think this vaccine licenses bad behavior, a young bride should not be protected?
44
Vaccinating girls and boys will contain the spread of HPV. Regardless of ideology or sexual preference, that is a good thing.
45
Wow. Loveschild is willing to have his children die of prostate and penile cancer just so some gay men get anal cancer as punishment for being gay. Can you call child protective services on a blog commenter?
47
High quality parenting, LC? You have an opportunity to protect your children from cancer, and your worried about sending the message that it's okay to have sex. Sheesh? Every child deserves to be vaccinated and every child deserves a parent with the good sense to protect them.
48
41
wow!
you really zinged me!!
I'm sure your AIDS and Syphilis and Gonorrhea
infected patients won't mind a bit, when you explain all the technicalities and definitions to them...
It's a proven fact that patients would rather be inadequately treated by a politically correct smart ass than get good useful advice that might challenge their preconceived notions.
wow!
you really zinged me!!
I'm sure your AIDS and Syphilis and Gonorrhea
infected patients won't mind a bit, when you explain all the technicalities and definitions to them...
It's a proven fact that patients would rather be inadequately treated by a politically correct smart ass than get good useful advice that might challenge their preconceived notions.
49
47
Does every child deserve a parent that will teach them that abstinence from sexual activity until marriage is the only 100% effective way to avoid unintended pregnancy and STDs?
Does every child deserve a parent that will teach them that abstinence from sexual activity until marriage is the only 100% effective way to avoid unintended pregnancy and STDs?
50
idiology aside, there is an arguement for vaccinating boys. One of the reasons that vaccines work as effectively as they do, is that they act as a blanket protection for the group. It makes it so unlikely that the one person who is resistant to the vaccine will run into another infected person who was also resistant to the vaccine. This is why kids with lukemia are now having trouble attending schools that allow unvaccinated kids to attend. If the vaccine is proven safe and effective it needs to be mandated as a part of matriculation into a public school.
51
Everyone should receive vaccinations for everything.
@40, does getting a flu shot encourage people to sneeze on each other more because they aren't morally obligated not to anymore?
Why would anyone argue against vaccines? As long as they've been tested and are safe, how can you argue to let people remain MORE vulnerable to potentially deadly diseases?
@40, does getting a flu shot encourage people to sneeze on each other more because they aren't morally obligated not to anymore?
Why would anyone argue against vaccines? As long as they've been tested and are safe, how can you argue to let people remain MORE vulnerable to potentially deadly diseases?
52
Even 11 may be a little late. As a boy my first anal experience was at 7, and now at 25 I'm in a long term hetero relationship. Luckily I'm still STD free.
53
I totally agree that boys and men should be getting vaccinated against HPV. I also think the FDA should extend the the availablility of vaccine to people over 26, so they can be protected, too, if they're not already carriers.
The HPV vaccine is currently licensed for women ages 11-26. I think that is terribly discriminatory to women over the age of 26. The FDA site says it's because the vaccine has not yet been proven to be safe and effective in women over 26, but it also doesn't seem like it's a big priority for the FDA.
The HPV vaccine is currently licensed for women ages 11-26. I think that is terribly discriminatory to women over the age of 26. The FDA site says it's because the vaccine has not yet been proven to be safe and effective in women over 26, but it also doesn't seem like it's a big priority for the FDA.
54
so Dan,
Why are anal cancer and penile cancers much more common in gay men than they are in heterosexual men?
Why are gay men 17 times more likely to develop anal cancer than heterosexual men?
It sounds like a case of 'Sex Advice Columnist Malpractice"...
Why are anal cancer and penile cancers much more common in gay men than they are in heterosexual men?
Why are gay men 17 times more likely to develop anal cancer than heterosexual men?
It sounds like a case of 'Sex Advice Columnist Malpractice"...
56
47@
I am the one who educates my kids about sexuality, i'm the one who needs to excersice good sense and institute in them the values that they need to thrive into a healthy adulthood. I'm responsible for them, the last thing i need are others sending the message to them that having sex outside of marriage or with people of their same sex is okay. If i allow that to happen then i would be irresponsible, throwing them in harm's way. That is what giving this to an 11 year old girl or boy does, it is completely ridiculous to compare this to a flu vaccine cause such a vaccine has nothing to do with sexual behavior, behavior. That's the purpose of an HPV, it is related primarily to sexual behavior, that by no means should imply that it shouldn't be treated in young adults who have free will to engage in sexual behavior but when you try to implement it with minors then your are clearly giving green light to minors to be engage in behaviors which they are not mentally nor physically capable of handling. That's why we have an age of consent.
I am the one who educates my kids about sexuality, i'm the one who needs to excersice good sense and institute in them the values that they need to thrive into a healthy adulthood. I'm responsible for them, the last thing i need are others sending the message to them that having sex outside of marriage or with people of their same sex is okay. If i allow that to happen then i would be irresponsible, throwing them in harm's way. That is what giving this to an 11 year old girl or boy does, it is completely ridiculous to compare this to a flu vaccine cause such a vaccine has nothing to do with sexual behavior, behavior. That's the purpose of an HPV, it is related primarily to sexual behavior, that by no means should imply that it shouldn't be treated in young adults who have free will to engage in sexual behavior but when you try to implement it with minors then your are clearly giving green light to minors to be engage in behaviors which they are not mentally nor physically capable of handling. That's why we have an age of consent.
57
@56 - you are a horrible parent. I hope your children succeed in spite of you. It's a parent's job to protect their children from easily preventable illnesses and dangers, not to be idealogically consistent. Ever think that your child could get HPV through rape? You suck.
And troll - of course it's because of the buttsex that there's higher cancer rates. What of it? Similar goes for cervical cancer in women (as someone else pointed out). Should women die of cervical cancer as well, even if they've waited until marriage to have sex? You fail at compassion and logic.
And troll - of course it's because of the buttsex that there's higher cancer rates. What of it? Similar goes for cervical cancer in women (as someone else pointed out). Should women die of cervical cancer as well, even if they've waited until marriage to have sex? You fail at compassion and logic.
58
HPV vaccine also prevents transmission of HPV to victims of pedophiles and rapists, another good reason to vaccinate both boys and girls at age 11, as well as to make the vaccine available to adults over 26.
59
57
heterosexual vaginal sex does not inherently cause cervical cancer.
but then, the vagina is biologically designed to be a receptive sexual organ.
not so the anus.
could that be a clue?
heterosexual vaginal sex does not inherently cause cervical cancer.
but then, the vagina is biologically designed to be a receptive sexual organ.
not so the anus.
could that be a clue?
60
Umm @59 - You're wrong. It does. Learn your facts. Why do you think sexually active women need a PAP smear every year?
61
PS> I meant at that heterosexual activity "inherently causes" cancer to a similar degree as homosexual activity does.
62
Oral cancers in guys are surging not for the traditional causes: booze and tobacco, but because of cunnilingus. Assuming straight guys will still want to get laid, HPV vaccines will protect their lips and tongues.
63
Allegedly @(This thread is lousy with his douchebaggery) is playing one of his favorite games. See, what he really wants to say is, Gays communicate more pathogens [because God hates gays], but this doesn't make sense, since, if we were to apply the same logic to, oh, say third world children, we'd find that God also hates the poor little tykes too, since God's viri pick the buggers off by the droves, and that just doesn't fit Allegedly's belief system that all things are pure and good that wear ties, go to tall churches and don't have abortions and buttsex.
Since we know what he's getting at, we feel the sting, and he gets to enjoy it without having expressedly said the bit that is hurtful.
So rather, he just states statistics that might suggest Gays communicate more pathogens and lets us come to our own conclusions, or rather our own conclusions of what Allegedly was trying to say without saying.
In the cold hard real world, poverty is, by far, a greater risk facter than gay sexual activity (for Allegedly's sake, specifically buttfuckery) when it comes to susceptability to illness. Poor straight, anally-virginal Christians just get things that are more socially acceptable to Americans, like swine flu and yellow hemorrhagic fever. This, leaving usually Catholic missionaries to explain the embarrassment of indiscriminate bad things happening to mostly good people who don't wear condoms.
So, Allegedly, you know the only way be 100% sure you avoid infection is to abstain... from everything, and stay in a room in which only air filtered of microbes passes through, and live off lactated ringers' fluids for your entire life, and hope your caretakers never make a mistake.
Heck, that's probably why you're so bitter.
More...
Since we know what he's getting at, we feel the sting, and he gets to enjoy it without having expressedly said the bit that is hurtful.
So rather, he just states statistics that might suggest Gays communicate more pathogens and lets us come to our own conclusions, or rather our own conclusions of what Allegedly was trying to say without saying.
In the cold hard real world, poverty is, by far, a greater risk facter than gay sexual activity (for Allegedly's sake, specifically buttfuckery) when it comes to susceptability to illness. Poor straight, anally-virginal Christians just get things that are more socially acceptable to Americans, like swine flu and yellow hemorrhagic fever. This, leaving usually Catholic missionaries to explain the embarrassment of indiscriminate bad things happening to mostly good people who don't wear condoms.
So, Allegedly, you know the only way be 100% sure you avoid infection is to abstain... from everything, and stay in a room in which only air filtered of microbes passes through, and live off lactated ringers' fluids for your entire life, and hope your caretakers never make a mistake.
Heck, that's probably why you're so bitter.
64
Fine, LC @ 56.
Gamble with the future health of your children. Gamble that they will always adhere to your values. You will loose, LC, at some point your children will step away from your enforced values, and they may or may not return. You could easily have them immunized, without telling them what the specific shot was for, have it done when they get their Tetanus or MMR booster. But, no you'd rather risk their lives. Your pathetic, Loveschild, simply pitiful. I hope your children don't have to bear the consequences of your decision. Your response suggests you are unworthy of your children.
Gamble with the future health of your children. Gamble that they will always adhere to your values. You will loose, LC, at some point your children will step away from your enforced values, and they may or may not return. You could easily have them immunized, without telling them what the specific shot was for, have it done when they get their Tetanus or MMR booster. But, no you'd rather risk their lives. Your pathetic, Loveschild, simply pitiful. I hope your children don't have to bear the consequences of your decision. Your response suggests you are unworthy of your children.
65
@56,
It is possible to get HPV through non-sexual behavior. It is spread through skin contact. Your kid could sit on a toilet seat that was previously used by someone with HPV and get infected that way. Rare, yes, but possible.
So you would allow your kids to remain vulnerable in this way just so you could feel morally superior? That's bad parenting. You should protect your kids regardless of how it makes you personally feel.
It is possible to get HPV through non-sexual behavior. It is spread through skin contact. Your kid could sit on a toilet seat that was previously used by someone with HPV and get infected that way. Rare, yes, but possible.
So you would allow your kids to remain vulnerable in this way just so you could feel morally superior? That's bad parenting. You should protect your kids regardless of how it makes you personally feel.
66
@59 Neither heterosexual vaginal sex nor anal sex "inherently" causes cancer. Viruses have evolved to be sexually transmitted, because it's a good way for the viruses to reproduce. Both types of cancer are caused by sexually-transmitted viruses. It is not because one behavior that is wrong and is being righteously punished, while the other behavior is okay and has tragic consequences.
67
Hey LC @56, we're seeing a pattern in our office: women in their early 20s, adult and living on their own, didn't get vaccinated because mom didn't want to "encourage" sexual behavior, comes in, gets a pap, has precancerous changes related to HPV and ends up needing surgery that may affect her fertility and her ability to carry a pregnancy.
Nice mom, huh?
Nice mom, huh?
68
Sorry, but only about 10% of the population is gay and I think (but please to show me some numbers) that penile and anal cancers are still more rare than cervical cancer.
So ... is it really economically viable to vaccinate boys.
Sorry, but like all other aspects of public health these recommendations are - have to be - a question of profitability. I know the cancer is horrible for the sufferers, but this is a question of the big picture. One death is a tragedy, a hundred thousand a statistic.
In short, I want to see a cost-benefit analysis.
So ... is it really economically viable to vaccinate boys.
Sorry, but like all other aspects of public health these recommendations are - have to be - a question of profitability. I know the cancer is horrible for the sufferers, but this is a question of the big picture. One death is a tragedy, a hundred thousand a statistic.
In short, I want to see a cost-benefit analysis.
69
@48- you didn't get zinged, you got p0wned. And it wasn't by attitude devant, it was by the commenter @33.
70
The vaccine is a great idea for boys.
But, sadly, most don't want it, because they think it's a "girl thing".
But, sadly, most don't want it, because they think it's a "girl thing".
72
60
61
Sorry, Grandma-
Not all sexually active women are at equal risk to get Cervical Cancer-
The most important risk factor for cervical cancer is infection by the human papilloma virus (HPV). Doctors believe that women must be infected by HPV before they develop cervical cancer.
Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), the virus that causes AIDS, also places women at higher risk for cervical cancer.
Chlamydia is a relatively common kind of bacteria that can infect the reproductive system. It is spread by sexual contact. Women whose blood test results show evidence of past or current chlamydia infection have a higher risk of cervical cancer.
It is not sex that predisposes women to cervical cancer-
It is sex with partners who will infect her with STDs that predisposes a woman to cervical cancer.
61
Sorry, Grandma-
Not all sexually active women are at equal risk to get Cervical Cancer-
The most important risk factor for cervical cancer is infection by the human papilloma virus (HPV). Doctors believe that women must be infected by HPV before they develop cervical cancer.
Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), the virus that causes AIDS, also places women at higher risk for cervical cancer.
Chlamydia is a relatively common kind of bacteria that can infect the reproductive system. It is spread by sexual contact. Women whose blood test results show evidence of past or current chlamydia infection have a higher risk of cervical cancer.
It is not sex that predisposes women to cervical cancer-
It is sex with partners who will infect her with STDs that predisposes a woman to cervical cancer.
74
@63 "Gays communicate more pathogens [because God hates gays]"
?
Don't be so tough on yourself.
If it were true that "Gays communicate more pathogens" (a premise that I do not accept) it would be because gays were engaging in behaviors that facilitate the spread of the pathogens. (@66 explains it well)
Don't blame God.
If a disease occurs disproportionately in a demographic group investigators can find out what behaviors and conditions are responsible and educate affected groups to empower them to protect themselves.
Failure to do so is cruel and irresponsible.
?
Don't be so tough on yourself.
If it were true that "Gays communicate more pathogens" (a premise that I do not accept) it would be because gays were engaging in behaviors that facilitate the spread of the pathogens. (@66 explains it well)
Don't blame God.
If a disease occurs disproportionately in a demographic group investigators can find out what behaviors and conditions are responsible and educate affected groups to empower them to protect themselves.
Failure to do so is cruel and irresponsible.
75
73
It is not.
It is not about homosexuals.
It is about anal sex.
The rectum is full of bacteria that cause health problems when they get in other body areas.
Uninfected people may safely engage in heterosexual vaginal sex without protection.
Anal sex is always going to be unsafe.
The presence of STDs just makes it more so.
It is not.
It is not about homosexuals.
It is about anal sex.
The rectum is full of bacteria that cause health problems when they get in other body areas.
Uninfected people may safely engage in heterosexual vaginal sex without protection.
Anal sex is always going to be unsafe.
The presence of STDs just makes it more so.
76
Thanks for the reminder, I'll be calling my pediatrician this afternoon to have my 13 year old boys vaccinated. Their sister has already received the HPV vaccination.
I wonder if the doc will give me a hard time about vaccinating the boys?
I wonder if the doc will give me a hard time about vaccinating the boys?
77
Thank you Uriel-238 @63 for a lucid examination of the (il)logic of our most prolific troll. Another good example of disease-causing behavior (which you hint at in closing) would be eating. The World Health Organization estimates the annual death rate from food-borne microbial illness in the US to be 5000 per annum. Shocking, really. (BTW our food-borne disease rates are literally 25 times higher per capita than the rate in France, 8 times more than in the United Kingdom.) No one is safe from this one, not vegans nor virgins.
78
@75 - so anal sex being less safe than vaginal sex is your point. The varying degrees of cancer risk related to various sexual activities cases your rage? Really? Everything has risk.
Even vaginal sex - you can never be sure who's uninfected. Also, vaginal sex is not totally safe, vaginas can get small tears during sex which can become infected, or yeast infections, etc.
Even vaginal sex - you can never be sure who's uninfected. Also, vaginal sex is not totally safe, vaginas can get small tears during sex which can become infected, or yeast infections, etc.
79
74: It's funny you should talk about preventative behaviors and infection, because when it comes to communicable disease, behavior is only the half of it. Studies that compared "behaviors" and infection levels of different communities found that behavior can be the exact same, and risk of infection is still higher among communities that have higher levels of infection already. The two communities that they looked at whose risk of infection was greater were gay men and impoverished African American heterosexuals.
Now don't get too excited. This isn't proof of your theory that god hates gays and blacks (he'd have to hate both for your logic to stand). It's proof that infection isn't necessarily a punishment for promiscuous or gay "behavior." It has as much to do with the community that you're involved with. People in gay communities tend to sleep with other members of the gay community. Middle-class white people tend to sleep with other middle-class white people. Etc.
The lesson is this: if that community that you are involved in has a high infection rate, then YOU are at a greater risk of infection, even if your level of promiscuity is the EXACT SAME as someone in a community with fewer infections. It's sort of like how a person can drive perfectly in extremely heavy traffic, and yet they're still at a greater risk of crashing than someone driving poorly on a deserted road. A gay man doesn't have to be frequenting glory holes every night to be at risk of contracting HIV.
So which conclusion do you draw from this? Can this mean that a virus is simply a neutral non-entity that has nothing to do with god punishing any sort of "behavior," and infection only has to do with the dynamics of how a virus propagates itself? Or does this mean that god hates black people? Pick your answer carefully.
More...
Now don't get too excited. This isn't proof of your theory that god hates gays and blacks (he'd have to hate both for your logic to stand). It's proof that infection isn't necessarily a punishment for promiscuous or gay "behavior." It has as much to do with the community that you're involved with. People in gay communities tend to sleep with other members of the gay community. Middle-class white people tend to sleep with other middle-class white people. Etc.
The lesson is this: if that community that you are involved in has a high infection rate, then YOU are at a greater risk of infection, even if your level of promiscuity is the EXACT SAME as someone in a community with fewer infections. It's sort of like how a person can drive perfectly in extremely heavy traffic, and yet they're still at a greater risk of crashing than someone driving poorly on a deserted road. A gay man doesn't have to be frequenting glory holes every night to be at risk of contracting HIV.
So which conclusion do you draw from this? Can this mean that a virus is simply a neutral non-entity that has nothing to do with god punishing any sort of "behavior," and infection only has to do with the dynamics of how a virus propagates itself? Or does this mean that god hates black people? Pick your answer carefully.
80
@78- UTIs, my ex never had them when she was having sex with women, as soon as we got together and started doing vigorous PVI they became a big problem. Hetero sex is dangerous.
81
80
now dwight shame on you did you tell her before hand about your career turning $10 tricks on the Southside?
now dwight shame on you did you tell her before hand about your career turning $10 tricks on the Southside?
84
79
Fascinating.
You're saying that taking moderate risks in a community where most people are infected is more likely to infect you than taking the same risks in a community where very few people are infected?
This turns the laws of averages and statistics totally on their head!
So I guess, extrapolating these shocking findings, that if I gulped a mouthful while swimming in the untreated lagoon at the sewage plant (don't ask...) I would be more likely to get sick than if I took the exact same gulp from a chlorinated pool?
Amazing!
Fascinating.
You're saying that taking moderate risks in a community where most people are infected is more likely to infect you than taking the same risks in a community where very few people are infected?
This turns the laws of averages and statistics totally on their head!
So I guess, extrapolating these shocking findings, that if I gulped a mouthful while swimming in the untreated lagoon at the sewage plant (don't ask...) I would be more likely to get sick than if I took the exact same gulp from a chlorinated pool?
Amazing!
85
Hey troll,
If you want to make it a fact that gay men have high rates of STD's, then lay it on the line: What's your point?
You have ONE chance to say what your point is, or know just how much of a shitheaded coward you are since you won't even say it from the safety of assured anonymity.
If you want to make it a fact that gay men have high rates of STD's, then lay it on the line: What's your point?
You have ONE chance to say what your point is, or know just how much of a shitheaded coward you are since you won't even say it from the safety of assured anonymity.
86
@79
Some "safe" behaviors are safer than others-
Abstinence works equally well and protects totally regardless of the level of infection in the community...
Some "safe" behaviors are safer than others-
Abstinence works equally well and protects totally regardless of the level of infection in the community...
87
@86 sure does - but what's your point? Abstinence cannot be forced on people, and doesn't work unless you're abstinent for life.
90
@88 - I am, but it's because of my sunny disposition, not because I take cheap shots at people on a blog.
91
@89 - I'm still trying to figure out how this ties in to not vaccinating children against a potentially fatal disease.
92
87
We wouldn't 'force' abstinence on anyone (exciting as it may sound...) but if people are educated as to what the actual risks and benefits are of the various brands of 'safe sex' out there many would make an enlightened choice.
Unbiased accurate education is all we are asking for.
We wouldn't 'force' abstinence on anyone (exciting as it may sound...) but if people are educated as to what the actual risks and benefits are of the various brands of 'safe sex' out there many would make an enlightened choice.
Unbiased accurate education is all we are asking for.
93
91
We never suggested not vaccinating anyone. Our kids are ALL vaccinated. Everyone should be.
But thinking that a vaccine solves the problem is erroneous and dangerous (and unfair to the naive) and avoids addressing the core problems, which are unhealthy unsafe behaviors.
We never suggested not vaccinating anyone. Our kids are ALL vaccinated. Everyone should be.
But thinking that a vaccine solves the problem is erroneous and dangerous (and unfair to the naive) and avoids addressing the core problems, which are unhealthy unsafe behaviors.
94
@92 Well, we agree on something. Accurate information about sex is very good. It should be taught in schools with age appropriate lessons. There are many agencies that do an excellent job, most notably planned parenthood.
96
Just because a vaccine can't cure all STDs, but does prevent one that could kill you, that means children shouldn't get it? That it doesn't prevent teenagers from having sex means children shouldn't get it? That seems to be your argument.
99
Ahh so you're an age-ist troll too, Allegedly @ 88 and 97. You take the name of Selma Dritz in vain AND shoot cheap shots at Karla all in one day. Nice. That's it, unregistered comments OFF for me---at least until the next time I feel like dealing with halfwit jerkwads.
Welcome, Karla Canadian! We are pleased to have you!
Welcome, Karla Canadian! We are pleased to have you!
100
Back to the OP, great post, Dan. I hope we hear your lucid argument on this next time you're on Maher or Olbermann.
Penile cancers from HPV can also occur among het men and would presumably be prevented by the vaccine. They're just very, very rare.
One point I'm not sure was brought out above: our dismally low rate of vaccinating girls (~30% according to the NPR story) is why vaccinating boys is so much more important in America than in the UK, where they don't have these fundie hangups about sex and therefore vaccinate a much higher percentage of their girls.
Penile cancers from HPV can also occur among het men and would presumably be prevented by the vaccine. They're just very, very rare.
One point I'm not sure was brought out above: our dismally low rate of vaccinating girls (~30% according to the NPR story) is why vaccinating boys is so much more important in America than in the UK, where they don't have these fundie hangups about sex and therefore vaccinate a much higher percentage of their girls.
101
Thanks attitude devant! I'm mostly a lurker, but sometimes I like to argue with trolls.
And troll - ummm.... I don't think my statement @96 was unclear - it was a continuation of my previous thought. Sorry you can't keep up unless I write which post I'm responding to in the actual message. It's also funny you think that picture's me.
And troll - ummm.... I don't think my statement @96 was unclear - it was a continuation of my previous thought. Sorry you can't keep up unless I write which post I'm responding to in the actual message. It's also funny you think that picture's me.
102
Sadly this is just big pharma scaring people. The women who get cervical cancer are not the same as the young girls who are getting the vaccination. 1 in 9 women will get breast cancer and we don't have the money to give them all preventive screening but somehow we are going to vacinnate young women 30 years before they are at risk of cervical cancer?
If you are a first generation immigrant who doesn't get proper gyn care you are at a very very small risk (less then a few thousand a year) of getting cervical cancer. Nearly all of us have had the infection (almost the same as how most kids get a cold but very few get pnemonia in their 60's)
This is nothing more then a way to make money by drug companies and no one even knows how long the vaccine works. Remember you don't get cervical cancer until your 40's or later and the risk is tiny - vs the cost.. Oh and once a state mandates it - guess what the drug company is no longer liable.. Get the flu shot. hep B etc but don't waste resources on this
If you are a first generation immigrant who doesn't get proper gyn care you are at a very very small risk (less then a few thousand a year) of getting cervical cancer. Nearly all of us have had the infection (almost the same as how most kids get a cold but very few get pnemonia in their 60's)
This is nothing more then a way to make money by drug companies and no one even knows how long the vaccine works. Remember you don't get cervical cancer until your 40's or later and the risk is tiny - vs the cost.. Oh and once a state mandates it - guess what the drug company is no longer liable.. Get the flu shot. hep B etc but don't waste resources on this
103
Dan Savage FTW! Seriously, it's science, people, not politics. How'd you all think things got so f#cked up in the first place? Science and politics is like politics and religion, or oil and water, or a $1,200 bottle of wine and liquid soap. Sure, they can mix, and sure, someone out there is doing it -- doesn't mean it's a great idea. It may make for great politics, but it sure makes for shitty science.
104
@3
"Oral and Anal intercourse present physicians with surgical as well as medical problems, ranging from anal fissures and impaction of foreign bodies in the rectum to major diagnostic dilemmas."
Please explain how oral sex is supposed to "cause anal fissures and impaction of foreign bodies in the rectum." Oh wait, you know what could cause that? Having your head up your ass.
@56 gives away her agenda with this:
"it is completely ridiculous to compare this to a flu vaccine cause such a vaccine has nothing to do with sexual behavior"
We don't need to protect health when risks are related to sexual behavior, because sexual behavior is BAD BAD BAD! Therefore, insurance shouldn't cover childbirth, since childbirth results from sexual behavior...
"Oral and Anal intercourse present physicians with surgical as well as medical problems, ranging from anal fissures and impaction of foreign bodies in the rectum to major diagnostic dilemmas."
Please explain how oral sex is supposed to "cause anal fissures and impaction of foreign bodies in the rectum." Oh wait, you know what could cause that? Having your head up your ass.
@56 gives away her agenda with this:
"it is completely ridiculous to compare this to a flu vaccine cause such a vaccine has nothing to do with sexual behavior"
We don't need to protect health when risks are related to sexual behavior, because sexual behavior is BAD BAD BAD! Therefore, insurance shouldn't cover childbirth, since childbirth results from sexual behavior...
105
sex-phobic religious ideology --> no vaccines for STD's for your kids --> your kids WILL have sex and will probably get sick....
God is punishing you for being stupid! Too bad you can't see it that way.
As for the people who think that STD's are a fair punishment for people who have sex not 'sanctioned by God,' just admit you're misogynists and be on your way. STD's usually have harsher effects on women -- and it doesn't matter how much sex the woman has had or with how many partners. It only matters how many people her PARTNER has slept with/is sleeping with. So even in the unlikely case that a woman is a virgin when she marries and never cheats, she can still get multiple STD's if her husband cheats or is not a virgin. So if STD's are a punishment, they're primarily a punishment for being female and sleeping with men. With that logic, I'm really not sure why the religious nuts hate lesbians....sure seems to me that God must like them best based on rates of STD's he 'gives' them!
God is punishing you for being stupid! Too bad you can't see it that way.
As for the people who think that STD's are a fair punishment for people who have sex not 'sanctioned by God,' just admit you're misogynists and be on your way. STD's usually have harsher effects on women -- and it doesn't matter how much sex the woman has had or with how many partners. It only matters how many people her PARTNER has slept with/is sleeping with. So even in the unlikely case that a woman is a virgin when she marries and never cheats, she can still get multiple STD's if her husband cheats or is not a virgin. So if STD's are a punishment, they're primarily a punishment for being female and sleeping with men. With that logic, I'm really not sure why the religious nuts hate lesbians....sure seems to me that God must like them best based on rates of STD's he 'gives' them!
106
@102-- You're joking right? You underwear models, you're such cards. I mean, if you're 40, you're pretty much done for anyway, so what's the big deal if you get cancer? Might as well smoke and have Eggs Benedict every day, too, really. I'll bet you won't vaccinate your kids against pertussis either.
But you're also wrong. Average age of first coitus in the US is quite young, approx 16 or 17, and the virus is so prevalent that, depending on your study population, a young adult has about a 45% chance of carrying it. To make things even worse, teen girls are in a particularly vulnerable period for the carcinogenic properties of the virus, having to do with ongoing maturation of the cervix. I have seen cancer in women in their 20s and 30s. I will admit that the cancer inducing process is slow, maybe 10 years from infection to cancer, but one of the lovely things about these viruses is that you can't eradicate them from the body. They insinuate themselves into the host DNA, and can be re-activated throughout the life span. A gift that truly keeps on giving.
But you're also wrong. Average age of first coitus in the US is quite young, approx 16 or 17, and the virus is so prevalent that, depending on your study population, a young adult has about a 45% chance of carrying it. To make things even worse, teen girls are in a particularly vulnerable period for the carcinogenic properties of the virus, having to do with ongoing maturation of the cervix. I have seen cancer in women in their 20s and 30s. I will admit that the cancer inducing process is slow, maybe 10 years from infection to cancer, but one of the lovely things about these viruses is that you can't eradicate them from the body. They insinuate themselves into the host DNA, and can be re-activated throughout the life span. A gift that truly keeps on giving.
107
Karla @101, I've been reading your old posts--I love your wit. Looking forward to rustling up some for trolls so you can pwn them like you did this one.
109
"In fact, the lifetime risk for contracting HPV is at least 50 percent for all sexually active women and men, and, it is estimated that, by the age of 50, at least 80 percent of women will have acquired sexually transmitted HPV (CDC, 2004; CDC, 2006)."
80%...that's a huge percentage. HUGE! I'm liking the fact that with the vaccine, those number will be decreasing with future generations.
80%...that's a huge percentage. HUGE! I'm liking the fact that with the vaccine, those number will be decreasing with future generations.
110
Oh, and I'm imagining those numbers will decrease even more once the vaccine is available to boys and men.
111
Ok, seriously, way back there 64 said something brilliant, which I summarize as "don't tell the kids what the shot is for". Most children don't know or care about what disease their immunizations protect against. All I thought when getting a shot was "ouch" and "do I get a lollypop now?". I still don't know what half the diseases I've been vaccinated against do, or how they are transmitted. An 11 year old girl or boy isn't going to know or care what HPV is, they will not even look it up online. So, no, there is no "green light" for sex because they don't know (or care) that the disease they've been immunized against protects against a sexually transmitted disease. So vaccinate and THEN pray they don't need it, rather than leave them unvaccinated and find yourself doubly disappointed.
112
As the mother of an 8yo boy, I sincerely thank you (& Andrew Sullivan, who quoted & linked you) for making me aware of this perspective. Gardasil has been such a question for parents of girls, and it really hasn't been on my radar. However, those of us with boys need to consider this seriously, as well.
That said, you neither help your point nor yourself to criticize parents of non-vaccinated girls for doing so purely for religious reasons. I know many parents who are very thoughtfully weighing the risks and benefits for whom religion doesn't even enter the analysis. (Never mind that it's not really helpful or accurate to describe any religious reason as necessarily "batshit crazy." You're making a very important point -- don't turn off people who NEED to hear it!)
That said, you neither help your point nor yourself to criticize parents of non-vaccinated girls for doing so purely for religious reasons. I know many parents who are very thoughtfully weighing the risks and benefits for whom religion doesn't even enter the analysis. (Never mind that it's not really helpful or accurate to describe any religious reason as necessarily "batshit crazy." You're making a very important point -- don't turn off people who NEED to hear it!)
Advertisement
Most Commented on Slog
-
Hating People Doesn't Make Them Thinner by Jen Graves
-
Los Angeles Gay Bar Bans Bachelorette Parties Until Marriage Equality Is Attained by David Schmader
-
Fill in the Blank by Grant Brissey
-
This Reminds Me of the Great Calculator Scare of the Late '70s/Early '80s by David Schmader
-
Idiot Tries to Defend Bigoted Anti-Gay-Marriage Preacher on Anderson Cooper by Paul Constant
-
Six Moms with Too Much Time on Their Hands and a Shitty Website Decide to Fight Gay Superheroes by Paul Constant
-
Why Mayor McGinn's Wife Canceled Her Family's Seattle Times Subscription by Eli Sanders
-
What the Hell Is Wrong With Seattle's Pride Parade? by Dominic Holden
-
The Saturday Morning News by Unpaid Intern
-
NYC Man Ticketed for Not Riding in the Bike Lane by Jonathan Golob
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (113) RSS