HPV Vaccine

I don't know how I feel about it. I thought it was pretty cool when I first heard about it. However I may be a tad biased because I had high-risk HPV for two years. It's been less than a year that I've finally started testing negative for it. Since I dealt with the cervical dysplasia (precancerous cells) and all the good stuff that goes along with getting the cells removed, and since I know how common HPV is (80% of sexually active people will acquire it in their lifetimes) I thought of it as a good thing.



It's just recently that I've been beginning to reconsider vaccines and things like that. So, I guess I'm not sure. I'd love to hear other people's POVs on it.

I had a blood test which showed I have no "bad" strains of hpv (I don't think they tested for the kinds that don't cause problems- apparently most people who have sex get some sort or another eventually). So I am doing something right. I know nothing of the risks of the vaccine, but I do know right now it's recommended only for younger women (11-26). I don't know if that's because this group is at higher risk, or if the vaccine is more risky for "older" women.



Oh, I found my answer:


http://www.cdc.gov/std/hpv/STDFact-HPV-vaccine.htm

i think it's ridiculous.

They don't care much about the low-risk strains, which cause genital warts; because they're harmless.

The high-risk strains are the ones that cause cervical dysplasia, and in turn, cancer.

HPV is spread even with condoms. Unless you're just abstinent, you're not doing anything right, you're just lucky. So far, anyway. Unless you have low-risk already, of course.

When they say they have tested it on girls and women 9 - 26, it's not like they followed them for 20 or so years and found out ... okay this vaccine protected them from the time they got it and through all kinds of raunchy sex and bam... they never got cervical cancer.



I just don't see how they can really know anything about it yet.

i'm kind of ambivalent about this. on the one hand great that it is a preventative for many forms of cervical cancer. on the other hand, it doesn't protect against all forms so women should still do their yearly paps. so...if women just do their yearly paps, things would be going good. back to the first hand, if it prevents 70% of cervical cancers that is that many fewer women dealing with cervical cancer.



i don't really see any risk with getting the vaccine so, why not?

I think it's a very good thing. I'm monogamous but I'd still like to have it.

I was monogamous, too. His past apparently caught up with him, and in turn, me.

I also think it's ridiculous.

I don't think it's ridiculous at all. My sister, who is an OBGYN, works alongside the woman who helped create/patent it. Regardless of whether or not it protects against ALL forms of the virus, I think it's incredible that there is a vaccine that can prevent cervical cancer of any kind. Considering that it is such a serious issue in our society. I applaud any and all measures to prevent serious illnesses in our society. I think it is always good to debate any new medical discovery, but I'm extremely unsettled by seeing so many women on this board out right calling it ridiculous without being open to developing a better understanding of it. I do agree that it has a ways to go, and we need more studies on it, but I would hope that people would be more open-minded and encouraged about such a tremendous step in medicine..

will those who say it's ridiculous explain why?

I hope it works. I'd probably consider getting if and when being sexually active ever comes up in my life.



Did anyone else see the preserved cervix from someone who died from this illness at body world?.

First, i think it's ridiculous to market this vaccine as an "anti cancer" vaccine.



to this and second, it's an anti- HPV vaccine, and only covers a few of the strains of the virus, which are commonly linked to cuasing cervical cancer.



further, and third, even with the vaccine, there is still the risk of cervical cancer from other causes (non HPV) AND from one of these strains of HPV or one of the other strains of HPV that can cause cervical cancer but is less likely to than these strains.



fourth, i think it's ridiculous to give this vaccine which causes very little coverage to young girls. It would make more sense to start vaccinating girls against hepititus C--a much more risky sexually transmitted disease. Although, there are movements to vaccinate babies against all strains of hepititus, even though they're unlikely to come into contact with the disease in question until after they've learned how to avoid it. but, i have an issue with vaccinating infants and young children, and that is related to why i have an issue with vaccinating young girls--before they get to choose their own sexual process--in regards to sexually transmitted diseases.



fifth, it provides so little coverage as to give a 'false sense of security' to young women and any woman who would utilize this vaccine. What is often not being communicated is that it only covers or protects against very few strains of HPV, it doesn't protect against cancer if you already have this strain of HPV or another strain that could cause cervical cancer, and it doesn't protect against those other strains of HPV anyway.



So it's essentially a useless medication since it's 'coverage' is so narrow.



without being open to developing a better understanding of it



this is a garbage statement. I have a very good understanding of the vaccine, it's history and the testing measures related to it, as well as the tests to date on this product (which are minimal at best--it seemed to me to be quite a 'rush job' in order to capitalize on the idea of being able to market an "anti-cancer vaccine" which this vaccine is not).

oh, and i forgot to mention that even those strains of HPV that are covered by the vaccine are "more likely" to cause cervical cancer, but also may not cause cervical cancer in any given woman. thus, the vaccine it only protecting those women who might get cervical cancer from these strains of HPV--many women who have these strains of HPV do not get cervical cancer from those strains, and/or do not get cervical cancer at all.



simply, these stains are "more likely" to cause it in some women, but not in all, further narrowing the 'band' of protection.