[jabba]

I thought this deserves its own thread.

HPV infections in men can cause throat cancer and genital warts.

MDs and researchers in the forum - Please share your opinions.

Men who got the Vaccine - Is it effective? Were there any side effects?

HPV Threads
thread-21571.html
thread-36454.html
thread-7127.html
thread-8398.html

Quote:

NY Times

Oct. 5, 2018

The HPV vaccine, which prevents cervical cancer and other malignancies, is now approved for men and women from 27 to 45-years-old, the Food and Drug Administration said on Friday.

The vaccine is Gardasil 9, made by Merck, and had been previously approved for minors and people up to age 26.

It works against the human papillomavirus, HPV, which can also cause genital warts and cancers of the vulva, anus, penis and parts of the throat. The virus has many strains. It is sexually transmitted, and most adults encounter at least one strain at some point in their lives. The vaccine protects against nine strains, including those most likely to cause cancers and genital warts.

“Today’s approval represents an important opportunity to help prevent HPV-related diseases and cancers in a broader age range,” Dr. Peter Marks, director of the F.D.A.’s Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, said in a statement.

The approval was based on a study in women ages 27 to 45, showing that an earlier version of the vaccine was highly effective in preventing persistent HPV infection, genital warts, vulvar and vaginal precancers, cervical precancers and cervical cancers related to the virus types covered by the vaccine.

The vaccine’s effectiveness in men ages 27 to 45 is inferred from the data in women, from its efficacy in younger men and from evidence that it created immunity in a study of men 27 to 45-years-old.

The most common side effects of the vaccine include soreness at the injection site, swelling, redness and headaches.

If a person has already been exposed to a particular strain of HPV, the vaccine will not work against that strain. For that reason, vaccination has been strongly recommended for young people before they become sexually active.

But even someone who has already been exposed to a few strains — but not to all nine in the vaccine — can still gain protection against the strains they have not encountered.

“This is great,” Dr. Lois M. Ramondetta, a professor of gynecologic oncology at MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston, said in an interview. “It’s a prevention vaccine. The best time to get it is before you turn 13 and have any intimate activity at all. But, that said, it protects against nine types of HPV, so if you have one of the types, you still can be protected from other HPV types.”

She added: “There is a whole generation of people we were missing who didn’t know about it. Doctors weren’t good at talking about it.”

She and Dr. William Schaffner, an infectious disease expert at Vanderbilt University, said people over 26 began asking doctors about the vaccine. Some were leaving marriages or monogamous relationships, expected to begin dating and realized they might be exposed to the virus.

“They want to feel protected to some extent,” Dr. Ramondetta said. “Now they have the opportunity.”

Younger people need two shots, but the older ones will need three, spaced a few months apart.

Dr. Ramondetta noted that tumors affecting part of the throat — called oropharyngeal cancers — caused by HPV are rising, particularly in men. The vaccine is believed to help prevent them.

Dr. Schaffner said a panel that advises the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has already been discussing the data on using the vaccine in older people, and is expected to make a recommendation about it. The recommendation could be universal, meaning that everyone in that age range should receive it, or it could be “permissive,” meaning that the decision is up to doctors and patients.

Once that group, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, recommends a vaccine, insurers generally cover it.

[NoMoreTO]

Good thread idea

I was once told that if you are going to have sex with one more person in your life, even if it would be a monogamous relationship, then you should get it.

Ultimately, pretty much every sexually active man or woman is carrying strains from previous partners, so by getting the vaccination you are reducing the possibility of picking them up. There are so many strains that the vaccine really only gets some of them.

Also remember that some of the most dangerous strains (throat cancer, penis cancer) are not visible to you.

Lastly, don't go down un necessarily on girls, its just additional risk. I'm saving it for a relationship. When I came up it was like 3rd base to get the woman primed, but now its more like a special service for the VIPs who have treated me well.

[Hypno]

The makers of this and other vaccines lobbied Congress strenuously to be immune from lawsuits.

So I don't know if there are any side effects but the manufacturers were certainly concerned about them and you are basically shit out of luck if there are. There is a victims fund from which you heirs can collect but its paid out of user fees so the manufacturers don't give a shit if you get sick or die. In fact, the entire industry takes a NPC attitude about this, and doctors don't even think its important enough to tell you about as part of your informed consent. I mean, why bother, since they can't get sued anyway.

[Tiger Man]

Thoughts:

1. This is an odd (but not entirely unsuspected) development. 27-45 years old? Men? Why? It is very, very uncommon for an individual to suddenly become seriously sexually active at 30+. That is, it is not likely there are many people who are not sexually active until the age of 27 (or 30, or 35) and then begin sleeping with a bunch of people. This is important, as your number of sexual partners has a direct affect on your odds of picking up one of the "bad" strains of the virus. Yes, you can be a virgin who settles down with some retired superslut and pick up all 18 bad strains, but that is both unlikely and your fault (unless you didn't know). In any case, my point is that it baffles me that anyone would think recommending vaccination to people who are leaving or have already left their peak sexual partner years is an effective method of combating transmission. As was pointed out in the linked article, this is not the Herpes Zoster vaccine - it doesn't work if you already have it.

2. There are over 40 subtypes of HPV. Approximately 18 of them are suspected to be oncoviruses. Something like 10 are, more or less, considered oncoviruses. None of these vaccines protect against all of the "bad" strains. Further, an overwhelming majority of sexually active people will both be exposed to (perhaps many strains of) HPV and pass the virus in to dormancy.

3. HPV is a listed cancer-causing virus. But, HPV causes cervical cancer much the same way pickled food causes stomach cancer. A large portion of the world's population are exposed to the carcinogen, and then a certain subgroup develop the related cancer. In the case of HPV, it is a minuscule fraction that go on to develop cancer. Despite this, HPV is said to be "responsible" for something like 5% of all cancers worldwide. I question this. And, I question whether they are grouping precancerous lesions (which are quite common in women) in this finding.

4. Multiple governments have (often quietly) stopped promoting the HPV vaccines on their vaccine schedules. As almost no credible information is available on this (from any said of the debate), it makes one wonder why they would do that.

5. Finally. Years ago, I did some work with a group of scientists and doctors who were at the gates during the height of the AIDS crisis. They were all fairly black pill on HIV/AIDS, in that they thought it was, essentially, nature kicking in and "correcting" the error of thousands of men having semi-anonymous, unprotected sex with thousands of other men. I fear some of that thinking rubbed off on me. We are seeing an increase in severe and, often, quasi-untreatable STDs. This is due to antibiotic abuse (scripting and failure to follow directions) and promiscuity. I have scant compassion for the second cause. I am aware I'm posting on RVF and I make that statement with "certain recent threads" still in my mind. But, still, I question why governments spend billions of taxpayer dollars researching, developing, and promoting drugs to prevent and treat diseases that are both entirely avoidable and self-limiting (that is, they essentially cure themselves - patients die or enter a state as in syphilis in which they can no longer convince other people to have sex with them). I know this is a black pill view. But, there are kids with bone cancer, and people with ALS, MS, and a host of other diseases that (as far as we know) they did not bring upon themselves. If the governments must insist on using our money for R&D grants, why not focus on those diseases?