posted
There is a new vaccination in trial stages for a strain of HPV that is associated with cervical cancer. Here's some information, including background. To summarize, HVP 16 is present in about 50% of cases of cervical cancer, and cervical cancer is either the second or third most common cancer in women, depending on who you ask.
Here's the rub -- to be most effective, people should be vaccinated before they become sexually active. There is apparently already a controversy about encouraging vaccination for pre-teens, because it could be seen as encouraging non-marital sexual activity. And it does not protect against pregnancy, obviously, or any other STD except for this one specific strain of HPV. Since there's no reason to get it if you're not going to have sex, some parents see it as implicitly telling their children they figure they're going to have sex anyway, so they might as well be covered.
I have heard that around 85% of sexually active adults will be exposed to one strain or another of HPV in their lifetime. I do not know if those numbers include adults who have only ever had one sexual partner, if they do, than the percentage among the rest of us is even higher. HPV is spread by skin-to-skin contact, so it can be spread without having actual fluid exchange, and can be spread between people who think they are "just fooling around" and not "going all the way." Other strains of HPV range from apparently harmless to being the cause of genital warts.
I'd like to know what y'all think about this, particularly the people who believe that non-marital sex is wrong, and plan on raising their children that way. Would you want your daughter vaccinated anyway, so if she grows up and decides not to live by the values you tried to instill in her she is at least partially protected against this form of cancer? Or, for that matter, if she marries someone who has not always shared the same values, or is not faithful to her. Or do you think the potential damage to the abstinance message outweighs those possibilities? What about having your child vaccinated when she is younger, and won't ask pesky questions about what it's about? (The vaccination requires three shots over a period of time.) Also, would you have your son vaccinated to mitigate the possibility of him spreading the virus to those he is intimate with?
For the purposes of this discussion, please assume that the studies conclude with no harmful side-effects found, please.
Posts: 7954 | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote: Would you want your daughter vaccinated anyway, so if she grows up and decides not to live by the values you tried to instill in her she is at least partially protected against this form of cancer?
Yes. (also using your assumption that no side-effects are found for getting the vaccination).
Cancer of the female organs seems to be a pre-disposition of my family. Any preventative would be a plus, and I don't feel it would be encouraging my child to try sex.
posted
Unless the vaccine somehow becomes useless without sexual activity within a certain time period, I don't think vaccinating a girl early should be seen as encouragement or permission to have sex early. It's just something any good parent should do, so that when their daughter does have sex (and they hopefully wish she gets to have that experience eventually), she'll have one less thing to worry about.
Posts: 45 | Registered: Jun 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Would you want your daughter vaccinated anyway, so if she grows up and decides not to live by the values you tried to instill in her she is at least partially protected against this form of cancer?
Hmmm. Probably not. There's no history of cervical cancer (and very little of other cancers) in my family. Jeff's, too. And because I expect her to not have sex until she's married and then be monogamous, most likely with a man who will also be a virgin when married, I probably would wait until she was 16 or so and talk to her about it. I would, though, make sure she had the information that it was available and most effective if given before she was sexually active, and would remind her of this before she moved out and after she moved out. Just to make sure she knows that if she is going to have sex, this is something she should do as well as using other forms of protection.
Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I would. Vaccines are vaccines. Besides, what if she has sex against her will? Which is an awful thing, but beyond her control, and at least the vaccine will give her protection from HPV.
Posts: 14745 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm with et on this one. Assuming no side effects are found, I'm in favor of vaccination (for both boys and girls). Not because I think they will be practicing behaviors that put them at risk, but because I see no reason not to decrease the risk, however small.
I would prefer to vaccinate them young. For ElJay's reason among others.
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think it'd be a good idea, definitely. I'm all for vaccinations. The idea of any kind of potential infection severely creeps me out. *has ocd fit* And I'd want to do anything to protect those I love as much as I could.
Also, out of curiosity, is the herpes virus the same as HPV? Because I thought that was the cause of genital warts. Like, one was herpes simplex I, and the other was herpes simplex II, and one caused cold sores on your mouth, while the other caused genital warts.
posted
Yes, if there were no side effects. If there were a vaccination for AIDS, I would get that and have my children get it too, and I don't want myself or they doing anything that puts us in the risk group.
If there were physical side effects to the vaccination, then no, but it would be included in The Talk. I think it's important to know about birth control and STDs and all of that, even if greatly don't them to use the knowledge. It doesn't change the reasons I would hope they would refrain.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by mackillian: I would. Vaccines are vaccines. Besides, what if she has sex against her will? Which is an awful thing, but beyond her control, and at least the vaccine will give her protection from HPV.
Hmm. But where would you draw the line? Would you put your daughter on the pill so that just in case she were raped she couldn't get pregnant?
I'm not trying to score a point off of you, just curious. I think I would treat this as any new vaccine that guards against a preventable disease: wait and see if there are any side effects first, then assess the risks and benefits.
I don't think that having teenagers receive the vaccine would be encouraging them to have non-marital sex. It's not like it protects against all the other possible consequences, and most of those are worse than HPV. HPV isn't exactly the one to worry about most.
posted
I'd get it, I'd have my kids get it, if it were safe, and lasted quite a while (like if they have to get the vaccination every year, I don't know I'd be as excited). But I'm not totally apposed to premarital sex, so i may not be the oppinion you wanted.
Posts: 5362 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
HPV might not be as worrisome (though, cervical cancer sucks) as other STDs, but if there's a vaccine, then it's one less worry.
And pregnancy isn't a virus. I also know that the chance of conception via rape is relatively low (feel free to look up actual numbers to back that up) and I'd wonder how that compared to HPV transmission rates.
*shrug* We get shots for tetanus, right? Does that mean we have to step on a rusty nail? Well, no. But it's nice that the vaccine is already in us to protect us from it, you know?
And no, I wouldn't make my daughter go on the pill just in case she got raped and could possibly get pregnant. But pregnancy isn't a virus. I would rather be safe than sorry. But if my daughter had irregular periods, cramps, or other things, the pill would be a welcome treatment option for it.
Posts: 14745 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't see how anyone can argue against the idea of giving this vaccine to their daughter (or son), regardless of moral standing or how you raise your kids. For instance, if the flu virus was primarily spread by, I dunno, kissing - and you expect your child not to be kissing anyone - would you discourage him/her from getting a vaccine? Expectations and reality are not always the same - and teenagers can be extremely deceitful to mothers who think they know everything about their children and their behavior (I speak from experience.) I'm not accusing anyone's child of being sneaky or dishonest, I'm merely saying...just in case, don't you want to prevent any harm from coming to your child for any reason? IMHO, this is not at all suggesting to kids that it's ok to have premarital sex or anything like that. It's just being safe.
Posts: 1225 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Herpes (herpes simplex virus) and HPV are two totally different things. A simple Google search will tell you the difference. Stay away from images unless you're prepared.
quote:At least 50 percent of sexually active men and women acquire genital HPV infection at some point in their lives. By age 50, at least 80 percent of women will have acquired genital HPV infection. About 6.2 million Americans get a new genital HPV infection each year.
posted
ElJay, you said that 85% of sexually active people will be exposed, my quote says 80% of women will actually have the virus.
Posts: 2064 | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
No, it says that 80% will have been infected. Once the infection runs its course I assume that they no longer have the virus, otherwise more than 20 million people would be infected. From your link:
quote:Approximately 20 million people are currently infected with HPV.
... About 6.2 million Americans get a new genital HPV infection each year.
So it can't last forever. That would suck if it did.
Posts: 10886 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
What's great is, now we have a test we can do along with the pap smear (done with the smear itself) to detect HPV and to determine whether that HPV is the high risk kind or low risk kind. The patient can then have a better idea of their risks.
I think that quote of 80% of all women having HPV seems AWFULLY high. In fact, I don't believe it. That's probably an extrapolation and I don't think it would be very accurate.
(Edit: I meant cervical strains of HPV. Missed a word. Warts on fingers and toes etc are forms of HPV also.)
posted
Actually twinky, I thought HPV was one of those viruses that tends to go dormant (enter the lysogenic cycle). Yup.Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
But according to my lacking health classes, if you've had HPV you are more susceptible to Cervical Cancer, so it still sucks.
Posts: 5362 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Theaca: What's great is, now we have a test we can do along with the pap smear (done with the smear itself) to detect HPV and to determine whether that HPV is the high risk kind or low risk kind. The patient can then have a better idea of their risks.
*nod* I had this done with my pap the other week. I think it's great that we can do this.
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:But according to my lacking health classes, if you've had HPV you are more susceptible to Cervical Cancer, so it still sucks.
Absolutely. Never said it didn't suck.
quote:Actually twinky, I thought HPV was one of those viruses that tends to go dormant (enter the lysogenic cycle).
Pardon my lack of understanding in this area, but does that mean that once you've got it, you've got it forever? I'd like to settle that particular question...
Posts: 10886 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't think you can settle that question, at least not right now. Some people tend to have the virus present for years and years. Some only have it a short while. The person may or may not have warts visible during this time. The person may or may not have any abnormal pap smears during this this time.
Posts: 1014 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Y'know, a lot of girls come in to the clinics before freshman year college starts, to get their meningitis shot, and sometimes for vaccination records etc etc. That might be a good time to routinely offer it. I realize it might be a bit late, but I think many pediatricians might have trouble recommending it to the 14-18 year olds unless they are requesting birth control from their doctor. So taking it along with the pre-college type vaccines, tests, etc would be easy. I suppose a lot of parents would still be offended/worried about it and if parents pay the bills they might see the shot listed by name.
Be interesting to see how this works out over the next few years.
Posts: 1014 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
That's a good idea, but since it needs three shots, the one visit wouldn't be enough.
As a sexually active adult, I intend to get it myself once it becomes available, provided the risk/benefit ratio seems reasonable. Satistically there's a good chance I've already been exposed, but since I've never had a problem and the article I linked above said that repeated infections bear higher risk, it seems likely that it would still be worth it. I will, of course, discuss that with my doctor after the vaccine is released. Posts: 7954 | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I strongly favor a vaccine for HPV. We should remember, and you can check this, that there are those who are exposed to HPV through non-sexual means. While people think of HPV as an exclusively sexual disease, some studies indicate that's not true. Sexually Transmitted Infections 1999 Oct;75(5):317-9, points out that those who are HPV carriers may transmit HPV to those by simple skin-to-skin contact, especially those who have lowered immunity (especially true of younger children).
In the end, a vaccine is a good thing, it's the right thing. It helps those who may be exposed against their will (rape/incest/molestation), those with lower immunity otherwise, etc.
I'd strongly favor my kids get treated if it were tested & safe.
Posts: 202 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
100 years from now, maybe we won't have to do those silly pap smears anymore! *happy tears*
BTW, just because the series takes three shots now doesn't mean it takes three shots to develope immunity.
Posts: 1014 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
This thread is reminding me that I need to make a doctor's appointment. My doctor has, again, left the practice. I've had I think 5 primary care providers in 6 years. I don't want to go meet another new doctor/CNP. *sigh*
Posts: 7954 | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm in the camp that thinks getting a vaccination does not equal encouraging sexual activity. It can merely be a way of protecting her health, because her future husband may have been exposed. If it helps to prevent cancer and the vaccine is found to be safe and effective through trials, then I wouldn't have a problem having my daughter vaccinated.
Like theaca mentioned, the shots and vaccinations for college are a good time to do it, IMO.
Posts: 14428 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Like theaca mentioned, the shots and vaccinations for college are a good time to do it, IMO.
Now THAT I would not have a problem with. I don't know why, but talking about it and letting them have it at age 17 or so just seems more reasonable to me than doing it at age 12 or 14.
Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Assuming successful conclusion to the tests, low risk of side effects, immunity is long lasting, etc, I’d do it while they’re getting their other pre-kindergarten vaccinations. Separate it completely from the idea of sexual activity and take care of it right along with measles, etc.
Especially if it turns out, as one of those links indicated, there's the possibility it can be transmitted non-sexually and even among small children.
Posts: 9866 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I agree with dkw, IF this becomes a standard type immunization, then all kids should just get it as little kids. No guilt over promoting sexual activity that way. After all, we do hepatitis B shots for kids now, right? However if it is considered a choice thing then a lot of kids will get missed and then I'd rescreen all teens prior to college. Sexually active kids and adults coming in for paps/STDs of course would get screened too.
Posts: 1014 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:I don't see how anyone can argue against the idea of giving this vaccine to their daughter (or son), regardless of moral standing or how you raise your kids. For instance, if the flu virus was primarily spread by, I dunno, kissing - and you expect your child not to be kissing anyone - would you discourage him/her from getting a vaccine? Expectations and reality are not always the same - and teenagers can be extremely deceitful to mothers who think they know everything about their children and their behavior (I speak from experience.) I'm not accusing anyone's child of being sneaky or dishonest, I'm merely saying...just in case, don't you want to prevent any harm from coming to your child for any reason? IMHO, this is not at all suggesting to kids that it's ok to have premarital sex or anything like that. It's just being safe.
My issue is not a sexual morality one, but that I'm very nervous about vaccines (most medicines for that matter) and I would need to believe a true risk existed, rather than believing it's safe and getting it "just in case".
Posts: 2711 | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:I would need to believe a true risk existed, rather than believing it's safe and getting it "just in case".
I hear that. I know that many people believe very strongly in the link between more vaccinations and higher allergy and asthma rates. And that's a BIG issue in my family.
Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
A disclaimer here, I do not have children and am not opposed to sex before marriage.
I think if it does prove to be safe and effective parents should be encouraged to allow their children (boys as well as girls, would you want your son to marry a girl then pass the virus on to her and end up loosing her to a preventable cancer) to have the vaccine.
If parents are teaching abstinence until marriage a vaccine that protects against one form of one virus that might lead to a disease is not going to undermine the message you are giving. There are still moral issues, pregnancy and STDs to back up your position.
One thing that has been mentioned in this thread is that HPV can be spread by touch. Many young people who are not ready to have sex will do more than holding hands before they are ready for sex. You may wish your son or daughter doesn’t do this, but even if they are committed to not having sex until they are married to someone who has not had sex with anyone else their boundaries may be in a different place.
Posts: 169 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:IF this becomes a standard type immunization, then all kids should just get it as little kids.
My worry with making it required is that none of the justifications for forcing vaccination before entry into school exist here. The other diseases can all be transmitted at school. Is there any indication that cervical-cancer-related HPV can be so spread?
Now, practically speaking, that's when I would have it done for my kids (if medically feasible). I have no problem with the exam at all. But I'm leery of forcing anyone to receive particular medical care, and without the public transmission potential, I'm not sure I can bring myself to make it coercive.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Dagonee: [QB]The other diseases can all be transmitted at school. Is there any indication that cervical-cancer-related HPV can be so spread?
You definitely didn't go to my high school.
Posts: 16059 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
(The vaccination requires three shots over a period of time.) Also, would you have your son vaccinated to mitigate the possibility of him spreading the virus to those he is intimate with?
![[Angst]](graemlins/angst.gif)
*has ocd fit* And I'd want to do anything to protect those I love as much as I could.![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
