Tapsearch Com EditorMore on HPV
March 1st 2007 02:20
This story is basically a straight-up attempt to support mandatory HPV vaccinations.
From it:
"More than one-third of American women are infected by human papilloma virus (HPV), which in rare cases can lead to cervical cancer, by the time they are 24 years old, according to a study published today.
"The new estimates suggest that there are 7.5 million girls and women aged 14 to 24 infected with the virus — about two-thirds more than an earlier but less broad-based study had found.
...
"The new findings, published in the Journal of the American Medical Association, are likely to further encourage use of a vaccine against HPV approved in June by the Food and Drug Administration for females aged 9 to 26. Its maker, Merck & Co., until recently was lobbying state legislatures to mandate vaccination of middle-school girls, a step that more than 18 states are moving toward."
Credit to the Washington Post, though, for at least including this detail:
"News of the higher-than-expected prevalence of HPV infection was balanced by the discovery that only 2.2 percent of women were carrying one of the two virus strains most likely to lead to cervical cancer — about half the rate found in previous surveys."
As well as the fact that these results don't indicate HPV is rising, only that it's higher than previously thought.
At any rate, the numbers simply don't justify alarm that teen and early-20s women are contracting HPV cases that eventually lead to cancer. As I pointed out yesterday, cervical cancer is incredibly rare -- and HPV has a 20-year-at-most incubation period before becoming cancer in rare cases. The mean cervical cancer case is diagnosed at age 48, meaning the woman contracted HPV at 28 or later. This is not a credible argument for mandatory vaccinations at age 12. (Again, as I showed yesterday, vaccinations are only guaranteed to work for 5 years.)
The fact that 20-year-old women get HPV, but rarely develop cancer, indicates that (A) the cases often clear up without doing any damage, (B) they're having more sex with different men than older women are, not exactly a shocker and (C) for whatever reason, their cases are less likely to end up harmful. This is a reason for further research, not alarm.
Robert VerBruggen
From it:
"More than one-third of American women are infected by human papilloma virus (HPV), which in rare cases can lead to cervical cancer, by the time they are 24 years old, according to a study published today.
"The new estimates suggest that there are 7.5 million girls and women aged 14 to 24 infected with the virus — about two-thirds more than an earlier but less broad-based study had found.
...
"The new findings, published in the Journal of the American Medical Association, are likely to further encourage use of a vaccine against HPV approved in June by the Food and Drug Administration for females aged 9 to 26. Its maker, Merck & Co., until recently was lobbying state legislatures to mandate vaccination of middle-school girls, a step that more than 18 states are moving toward."
Credit to the Washington Post, though, for at least including this detail:
"News of the higher-than-expected prevalence of HPV infection was balanced by the discovery that only 2.2 percent of women were carrying one of the two virus strains most likely to lead to cervical cancer — about half the rate found in previous surveys."
As well as the fact that these results don't indicate HPV is rising, only that it's higher than previously thought.
At any rate, the numbers simply don't justify alarm that teen and early-20s women are contracting HPV cases that eventually lead to cancer. As I pointed out yesterday, cervical cancer is incredibly rare -- and HPV has a 20-year-at-most incubation period before becoming cancer in rare cases. The mean cervical cancer case is diagnosed at age 48, meaning the woman contracted HPV at 28 or later. This is not a credible argument for mandatory vaccinations at age 12. (Again, as I showed yesterday, vaccinations are only guaranteed to work for 5 years.)
The fact that 20-year-old women get HPV, but rarely develop cancer, indicates that (A) the cases often clear up without doing any damage, (B) they're having more sex with different men than older women are, not exactly a shocker and (C) for whatever reason, their cases are less likely to end up harmful. This is a reason for further research, not alarm.
Robert VerBruggen
| 48 |
| Vote |
Add To: 
Subscribe to this blog
Comment by Damo
In Australia where the vaccine was developed the opposite was true. There was a huge fight to have the vaccine made freely avaliable.
Comment by Robert V
There is no resistance to the vaccine itself -- the government Food and Drug Administration approved it, and to my knowledge no one is trying to discourage its use by people at risk for HPV.
The question is whether the government should pay to vaccinate people for a disease that's (A) rare and (B) communicable only by sexual contact. In that regard Americans are skeptical, especially when it comes to giving an STD drug that lasts 5 years to 12-year-olds, as the current legislation proposes.
Comment by Damo
Contact: Prof. Ian Frazer, Director
Centre for Immunology & Cancer Research, The University of Queensland, QLD 4072
International Telephone: 61 7 3240 5315
Email: IFrazer@cicr.uq.edu.au
Website: http://www.cicr.uq.edu.au/