It is probably one of the most significant medical breakthroughs of this past decade. A vaccine to prevent cancer! We now better understand the link between cancers and viruses and how some viruses such as the human papillomavirus (HPV) can change cells and cause them to become cancerous. In essence we have identified a communicable form of cancer.
HPV is often a sexually transmitted disease, which according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) is very common and it infects about 6 million people a year. It's estimated that 50 percent of sexually active men and women have been exposed at some point in their lives. There are hundreds of strains of HPV; about 30 to 40 of the strains are sexually transmitted. In the majority of the infections our body's immune system takes care of it without any treatment. However some of these sexually transmitted infections can cause cervical cancer. It's the high-risk strains the virus that remain in the body and cause a long-term infections. It then invades the cells of the cervix causing changes in the cellular structure and DNA to become pre-cancerous lesions as well as cause genital warts. If these infections aren't detected and treated they can go on to eventually become an invasive cervical cancer.
The National Cancer Institute estimates that 12,200 women in the United States will be diagnosed with this type of cancer and nearly 4,200 women will die from it. Worldwide cervical cancer strikes nearly half a million women each year killing almost a 250,000.
But we now have developed a monumental vaccine that protects against the common HPV strains that cause about 70 percent of cervical cancers. HPV has also been recently linked to 26 percent of head and neck cancers as well as some vulvar, vaginal, penile and rectal cancers. This discovery has opened a new door for prevention of cancer.
Yet, an alarming new study from the University of Maryland School of Medicine finds sadly very few young women are protecting themselves from cancer and taking this precaution of the HPV vaccine. This study led by Dr. J. Kathleen Tracy found that less 30 percent of young women eligible for the vaccine will chose to get it. Added to that, of the women who do initiate getting vaccinated less than one-third complete the series of three booster shots required for full protection of the virus. This was even more of an issue with young African-American women who were the least likely to complete the series of shots.
The CDC currently recommends beginning vaccination of girls 11-12 years of age with completion of a series of 3 shots up to age 26. The hope is to vaccinate young women before they become very sexually active and get exposed to the virus.
There is a debate among scientists on whether adolescent boys should also be vaccinated. While men don't have cervical cancer they do get genital warts, head and neck as well as penile and rectal cancers. Recent research has shown a new demographic of younger men with head and neck cancers that never smoked or drank alcohol which was considered a risk factor in these cancers. Instead these younger demographics of patients were found to be HPV positive. So the same way the virus gets into cells of cervix and changes the cells, it also does the same with the cells in the mouth and throat.
The public health community also advocates vaccination of boys as a form of "herd immunity." What this means is if we vaccinate boys we will see the less men walking around with HPV thus the fewer women will be infected too. However the CDC came in just short of a recommendation for boys, stating physicians and parents have the option to vaccinate them. But this University of Maryland study shows we are not even vaccinating our daughters. And it is disturbing for me as physician and a mother to see a safe and effective vaccine that can protect against cancer, be so underutilized!
Perhaps it is suggestive of our collective lack of emphasis on preventive medicine as a whole. Our sedentary lifestyle and obesity rate is a testament to that. We are so good in the American medical community at fixing and treating chronic diseases after they happen, we need to now concentrate on providing more preventive measures for our patients. As well as emphasizing to them that they must also bear some personal responsibility to maintain their health with good habits.
Add to the mix our misguided distrust of all vaccines. We seem to have short-term memory when it comes to the tens of thousands of children that died every year not long ago from infectious diseases that we now give immunizations for now and take for granted. Now unless vaccines are mandated for things such as school enrollment we don't bother, as evidenced by our yearly battle with the flu vaccine.
Or perhaps it's our prudish mores, which don't approve of vaccines that protects us from sexually transmitted infections. Some groups feel it might in some way be sending the wrong message to young girls. Certainly no one in the medical community is advocating sexually promiscuity for young women, nor trying to send the message that safe sex is no longer needed once you are vaccinated. We are also continuing to advocate pap smears exams for women at the age of 21 or for those who are sexually active.
But whatever the reasons, this vaccination rate is a travesty. We as parents want to protect our children from everything and years ago if someone had told you they have a shot to prevent cancer it would seem like a miracle. It makes no sense now; with all our earnest endeavors and talk of trying to find a "cure for cancer" we are overlooking our children's chances to prevent it in the first place.
Dr. Jon LaPook: HPV Affects Half Of U.S. Men
Glenn D. Braunstein, M.D.: Extreme Hygiene: Infectious Germs Are Bulking Up at the Gym
William Schaffner, M.D.: 'Have We Politicized Our Public Health?'
Martha Rosenberg: HPV Vaccine: Would You Give Your Kids Gardasil and Cervarix Vaccines?
Vaccinated children have TWO risks: getting the disease AND suffering from side effects directly related to the vaccine. There is NO guarantee that vaccines will prevent the disease they are "designed" to prevent. I'll take my chances with annual pap smears.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_13plsrydPY&NR=1
I honestly believe that Marsha knows the relationship between HPV infection and cervical cancer. It works like this. If you don't get infected with certain strains of HPV, then you will not have a chance of getting the relatively rare persistent infections that cause the lesions that cause cervical cancer in women. If we were to follow what Marsha pretends, then no one would believe that Pap smears and treatment of lesions don't prevent cancer. Which is ridiculous. Cervical cancer goes through a number of stages before it is cancer and if you remove those lesions, they don't result in cancer.
Gardasil prevents infection with strains causing about 70% of cervical cancer. Cervarix protects against about 80% of the strains. A new version of Gardasil in a couple of years will protect against over 90% of the strains.
Since I honestly believe that Marsha knows about the relationship between vaccination and cancer, it is wrong for her to pretend otherwise. Which she keeps doing.
Vaccines cause cancer too? One more reason to skip them.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=31Irc8CHK0c
The trade off for having childhood disease, that most always strengthened immune systems, was replaced by epidemics on a scale that's so massive it, now, takes one in three of us in cancer before age of 65 & 1 in 110 children in neurological disorders called autism.
Doctors have been trained to blame media, saying there has been no increase. They say cancer & autism have always been prominent but we never noticed until media began reporting it. They also blame the rise in autism on better diagnosis but if that was so, we would have noticed these victims all around us, if they had actually been there all along.
We know this is a lie because we can see with our own eyes how widespread both cancer & autism have become.
We never saw such epidemics years back & the rise has been right in step with the increase in vaccinations through the years.
National Cancer Institute:
http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/factsheet/Prevention/HPV-vaccine
http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/understandingcancer/HPV-vaccine
CDC:
http://www.cdc.gov/hpv/vaccine.html
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/columns/Time-for-the-truth-about-Gardasil-89466882.html
Principals to live by (and to teach your children).
1) Lead a healthy lifestyle.
2) Eat a healthy diet with copious fresh fruit and vegetables.
3) Eat a high-fiber diet.
4) Learn about and practice safe sexual behavior.
5) If you drink, drink in moderation (defined as less than 7 drinks/week for women; less than 13 drinks/week for men).
6) Inform yourself about HPV vaccines (Gardasil/Cervarix). You decide. For yourself and for your family
7) Do not smoke. This seriously increases the risk for Cervical cancer (and many other cancers).
"Women who smoke are about twice as likely as non-smokers to get cervical cancer. Smoking exposes the body to many cancer-causing chemicals that affect organs other than the lungs. These harmful substances are absorbed through the lungs and carried in the bloodstream throughout the body. Tobacco by-products have been found in the cervical mucus of women who smoke. Researchers believe that these substances damage the DNA of cervix cells and may contribute to the development of cervical cancer."
-American Cancer Society.
ISBN-10: 0313350116
ISBN-13: 978-0313350115
------------
Someone left a comment at my blog, www.vaccineswork.blogspot.com recommending this book. So I got it from my local library. It certainly advocates the use of the vaccine. But it explains a lot of the issues and provides a great background.
One of its strengths is explaining that it isn't just the cervical cancer that the vaccine will prevent that matters, but it is also also the great reduction in those abnormal pap smears and all the concerns that they bring and that she understands as a board certified gynecologist and family practice physician.
"Yes, we are making progress in defeating the fear mongers. Look what happened in 2010. Andrew Wakefield was exposed for the unethical dishonest man that he was. The 'vaccine court' reported 3 separate decisions by 3 special masters concluding that even with the lower standard of proof needed, thimerosal did not cause autism. And a new case control study that didn't show a link between thimerosal and autism."
That's not true, Sheldon. That was an orchestrated witch hunt against the good doctor. They may have taken his license but they can't take the truth. Dr. Wakefield is going stronger than ever because he loves children.
"Andrew Wakefield speaks at Parliament on Autism"
http://autismfile.com/category/media/videos/
The man knew that his paper would public health consequences. When questioned about the selection process for the children in the study he was dishonest. He had to be dishonest because the truth, that they were kids whose parents blamed MMR for their malady and were interested in suing the vaccine makers, meant that his finding of a correlation between MMR vaccination and autism arising afterwards wouldn't be a discovery, but merely a statement of what was already true of the kids. It wouldn't have been published in The Lancet. That's not the action of an honest man.
Anyone interested can read the actual decision at Google Documents https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=explorer&chrome=true&srcid=0B7TTKX7laEzvMzk2Y2Q4ZGUtZDA5Mi00NGY3LTg5MjAtZDQ1NzE4ODg0ZTQz&hl=en
I want to thank you for pointing out that there could also be a positive link between a Mercury based bactericide called Thimersal which is used in a lot of vaccines (but no longer in MMR !!!) and the abnormally high levels of mercury found in Autistic children - i used to think that that was simply because their impaired G.I System and compromised Immune System were simply unable to process heavy metals. So, upon checking, i find that the level of this Mercury based product in the MMR vaccines at the time of Dr Wakefields study was 154 times the maximum recommended level by the C.D.C - thats fifteen thousand percent too much in just ONE vaccination. NO WONDER OUR CHILDREN ARE REGRESSING AT AN ALMOST EXPONENTIAL RATE
The evidence from the GMC is that when they read the news reports, they decided on their own to investigate. On the Monday, according to Brian Deer, they contacted him and asked for information that he had. On the Wednesday, Brian Deer started supplying them with information.
In addition, the standard of proof used in the hearing was the criminal one, beyond a reasonable doubt. The current standard is the civil standard, on the balance of probabilities.
The reality of dealing with cervical cancer from HPV: The biopsies are excruciating, the outpatient surgical procedures are painful during the process and for many weeks afterward, the more invasive surgeries complicate pregnancy and can even end a woman's chances of having a baby, and even after successful treatment of the cancer, the woman must worry about going through the whole ordeal again for as long as the HPV virus remains active in her system.
About the five women I know with HPV: For one of them, it was her first sexual experience. Of the five, all required surgery for precancerous lesions. Two had cervical lesions which were easily removed during out-patient surgery, however, enough of the cervical tissue was removed that the uterus would not be able to support a pregnancy to full term without follow up surgery to reconstruct the base of the cervix. Even with the surgery, a pregnancy would require bed rest from the middle of the 2nd trimester until childbirth. The three other friends had lesions on the outside of the genital area, requiring laser surgery that was excruciating during the surgery and for several weeks afterward, and left permanent scars.
Do YOU know any women who have suffered through cervical cancer? A post-vaccine fainting spell pales in comparison.
This is Gabrielle:
http://www.nvic.org/vaccines-and-diseases/HPV/gabrielle.aspx
Gabrielle had a severe reaction to the Gardasil shots.
"Gabrielle is currently under the care of pediatric neurologists. She has been diagnosed with Inflammation of the Central Nervous System as a result of a Gardasil vaccine reaction. Her prognosis is not good. Without a medication or something that can be done to stop or modify what this vaccine is doing to her body, we have been told she will die. The progressive deterioration has been rapid."
Yes, cervical cancer really sucks. It is also preventable, can easily be detected with yearly pap exams, and is luckily highly treatable. Gabrielle's seizures, severe migraines, and heart troubles do not seem to be responding to treatment, however. Her illness was also preventable.
Frankly, I don't believe the neurologists actual stated that the harm resulted from HPV vaccination. Because that's really going out on a limb.
I'm surprised that you don't know that most cases of cervical cancer are in those women who haven't had regular pap smear in the prior 5 years.
You also didn't note that the anecdote is dated December 2008. For all we know, the teen may have fully recovered from then to now. On the other hand, people who die don't recover. There may have been an exception or two, but that was only short term.
(Are we supposed to hear foreboding music in the background when we see your username and avatar? LOL)
First, I will note that you, still, have failed to responded to a single one of the many presumptuous, and false, slurs that you made against me between 11/15 and 11/18/10 (e.g., “right-wing fundamentalist thugs”). It seems an apology or even a correction of the record isn't going to come from you.
Regarding your statement, "For the THIRD time, here is the elephant in the room:”
In fact, I did respond to your “elephant in the room” yesterday, twice (see my posts below at 3:51 am, 11/20/10; and at 4:31 am, 11/20/10). As I said then, “Why on earth would you presume that I don’t know, or care, about the suffering that cervical cancer patients go through?”
My point was clear - you have been limiting your responses to the potential side effects of a relatively safe vaccine without comparison to the much more serious consequences of contracting a high-risk strain of HPV. -AND- You still have failed to give serious consideration point-by-point (as experienced by the patient) of the difficulties and pain endured by the woman from the time of diagnosis through treatment of dysplasia, and the further pain and fear of an actual cancer diagnosis.
I've been reading your posts and ignoring them because 1) You've consistently denied your participation in disruptive activities, even though the comments bear out every detail that I've mentioned. 2) I'm not fresh off the turnip truck- your posting of COPIOUS pages of egregious disinformation is pretty much the oldest trick in the book to get the last word in by burying the whole discussion in a quagmire that would take days to sort out. Your responses are a joke- you complain about me calling names, but you go to the trouble of mocking my screen name and even my avatar, which most people find amusing. I’m sorry they scare you. I find your ignorance scary.
I think you have been way too patient and polite to Kitten. Just ignore is my suggestion.
Fear is not a good reason to get vaccinated and she is definitely trying to scare people.
Jon, I did not say you ignored my posts. I said you pointedly ignored the elephant in the room- and ironically, you continue to do so, using a staggering volume of disingenuous tripe to bury in verbiage what you cannot dispute as truth. So, once again, here is the elephant:
One cannot responsibly discuss the risks of Gardasil without taking into consideration the misery of dealing with the cancer caused by the high-risk HPV strains. The biopsies are excruciating, the outpatient surgical procedures are painful during the process and for many weeks afterward, the more invasive surgeries complicate pregnancy and can even end a woman's chances of having a baby, and even after successful treatment of the cancer, the woman must worry about going through the whole ordeal again for as long as the HPV virus remains active in her system. THIS is the most important issue, because the suffering and death caused by cervical cancer is the whole reason someone would take a calculated risk on the vaccine in the first place. Do you know any women who have suffered through cervical cancer? A post-vaccine fainting spell pales in comparison.
You also claimed, “JonGH has … taken sides with several of the fundies who came through here a couple of days ago flagging the mildest of informational posts. He encourages the disruption at every opportunity." That is also not true. I did not flag any of the pro-Gardasil vaccine comments you alluded to. And I did not encourage anyone to flag those comments. And I did not “encourage disruption at every opportunity.” In fact, quite the opposite. And there is proof. It is called the record. Go back and take a look.
The truth is I --criticized-- individuals on my side of the debate(!) who were unnecessarily and inappropriately flagging one of Sheldon’s posts four days ago, and called for more fair and judicious use of the abusive flag.
Then you claimed that I “defended” AnnainLA “several times.” That is false, again. The record speaks for itself. AnnainLA has posted 33 comments on this article since 11/14/10. Out of all of those 33 posts, I responded to 2. One where I simply seconded her recommendation for an excellent book written by Marcia Angell MD (former editor of the NEJM) that addresses systemic problems within the pharmaceutical industry. My other post was where I --criticized-- AnnainLA for her statement that, “Nearly all pharmaceuticals are not only useless, they are dangerous.” I disagreed, so I posted this, “That is an extreme, absurdist statement.” (JGH, 02:27 pm, 11/17/10).
So much for 'defending' AnnainLA “several times."
Then you told Dugmaze, a vaccine debate regular here for over two years (and one of the nicest guys around) that since he didn’t have a cervix that he essentially had no right to express an opinion about Gardasil vaccination policy or safety. I’ll let your words speak for themselves. You told him, quote, “You don't have a cervix, Doug. Why do you have an opinion on Gardasil.” (Kitten of Doom, 11/14/10, 11:08:07)
Then you called those who question the safety of the Gardasil vaccine, “ignorant” “D0UCH3bags.” (Kitten of Doom, 11/15/10, 07:24:55)
Wow. Just wow.
The problem with your posts is not the technical facts that you supply regarding the HPV virus, cervical cancer, or the HPV vaccine (when you supply them, they are correct). The problem is your tone, approach, and language.
Specifically: (a) Your username reflects intimidating, hostile approach to others. (b) Your avatar reflects an intimidating, hostile approach to others. And, (c) your language is sometimes explicitly insulting and hostile.
Calling individuals who question the safety profile of the Gardasil vaccine, “ignorant D0UCH3bags” or “right-wing fundamentalist thugs” is the problem.
The second problem has been your catastrophic failure to correctly identify WHO those who have Gardasil-vaccine-safety concerns ARE here at the Huff Post. You have repeatedly used a broad brush to portray those here who have Gardasil-vaccine-safety concerns as “right-wing fundamentalist thugs” or “fundamental Christian anti-sex moralists.” You could not be more in error about who we are.
Early (before age 18) sexual activity
Using the birth control pill
Having multiple partners
How about we tell girls that these behaviors may lead to STDs, infertility, and other serious problems, rather than just offering a magic shot that might kill or paralyze them (and won't protect them from other STD's) ? Or would you deny this knowledge to girls and put them at risk? I wonder how many doctors warn their teen patients that using the pill makes the cervical area more prone to cancer and infections? Or are they not mature enough to hear the truth, but still mature enough to have sex?
What if your daughter marries her high school boyfriend, and stays married? Would you still consider it I good idea to risk permanent damage from the vaccine? Gardisil is one of the most obvious causes of rare, but potentially lethal side effects among current vaccines. Anyone who does a little research can easily find many stories of vaccine-injured girls. And all to prevent an STD that any one girl in particular may not be at risk for.
Even Prince William and Kate stopped seeing each other for a while.
The only way to protect your daughter is to have her betrothed at the age of 12 and have both of them locked up with chastity belts before and after marriage. Will you hold the key? But even then, I don't believe you actually need intercourse to pass on HPV.
?????
You mean wait until they have had a dozen partners, and then decide they are "high risk"?
It will be too late by then, they likely as not will be exposed/infected. Even assuming someone uses condoms, the risk of HPV is high since it is not ejaculate that carries the virus, but the whole genital area, and don't tell me this will not be touched or somehow come into contact with the female partner at some point in the proceedings.
quote: She developed had uncontrollable movements, extremely high heart rate (up to180 bpm), high fevers including one that was 108.7 degrees, and at one point she was placed in a medical induced coma. Yet they couldn’t tell us what was wrong or why it was happening, so they instead spent most of their time blaming us and trying to prove that she was faking it. No one would go on the record to say that the Gardasil vaccine did this to Zeda.
What's also sad is fear mongering. The issue isn't whether bad things happen a week after vaccination with HPV. The issue is whether more of those bad things happen after vaccination than was expected. The answer from the very large number of those who participated in the studies leading to the approval of Gardasil and Cervarix is no.
The US also has VSD, which uses medical records at 8 HMOs which compares those who did and didn't get HPV vaccination.
There is also a passive system where reports are submitted, VAERS. VAERS is good for spotting unusual medical conditions, such as intessusseption and Rotashield. Only 2 conditions raised 'signals' (something to look into)
One is fainting. Mere fainting isn't a problem, it is the falling down that is the problem. The solution is to watch for signs of fainting at the time of vaccination and also have everyone vaccinated sit, under observation, for 15 minutes.
[There were also increased reporting of ... pulmonary emboli (blood clots of the lungs) compared with what has been found for other vaccines given to females of the same age. Of the people who had blood clots 90% had a known risk factor for blood clots, such as taking oral contraceptives (birth control pills). VAERS reports cannot prove the vaccine caused the adverse event in women with these risk factors. However, this finding needs further investigation." http://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/Vaccines/HPV/jama.html
I am saddened if stories of rare problems puts people off having potentially life saving vaccines. Every year in the USA around 4000 families will suffer the loss of a woman from cervical cancer, in many cases having endured horrendous pain and suffering. Every one of these families will be devastated and wishing their loved one had been given the chance of a vaccine.
Here is one of them.
http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/OnCall/story?id=2053572&page=1
Having the vaccine is safer than flying in an airplane, or driving in a car. How do you live your life, and assess risks? Do you avoid all travel, just to avoid a tiny risk?
Sick people go to the hospital and dead people are taken to the morgue- hospitals report trends directly to their local Department of Public Health. A coverup is impossible. Under-reporting is impossible.
The only chance a pharmaceutical company has to falsify data is during trials. Once the vaccine is distributed they are powerless to control the data resulting from its use. Gardasil has now been widely distributed, with no more than the average problems associated with a vaccine. A couple of British tabloids misquoted a doctor and misrepresented the case history of Natalie Morton, the bad press went viral, and suddenly people who've never looked up stats for a vaccine before are horrified to find that there might be ::gasp::: side affects. I've gotten sick for a few days after every flu shot I've ever received, but I keep getting them because they prevent the 3 months of lingering bronchitis that I USED TO get before the flu shot.
I've seen people go through VAERS and it ain't easy. In one case, they "lost" the documentation of the vaccination. If not for additional records and copies, the claim would have been denied. It was finally approved and a vaccine was named as the cause for paralysis and neurological damage.
When a serious defect is found in a car, a recall is issued- because the part can easily be redesigned and replaced, and guaranteed to work in an identical set of vehicles.
Vaccines are tested to the best of current research capabilities, but they are injected into complex human beings, each with unique anomalies to their immune systems from their own DNA, potential preexisting conditions, environmental factors, exposure to other viruses, and overall general health. It's a miracle that vaccines work for so many people in the first place. To expect them to work perfectly and without at least a few people experiencing serious problems is unrealistic. The rest of the population should not be denied an important protection due to what is a relatively small risk.
Almost all pharmaticals are ineffective and have side effects that are worse than the symptom for which they are prescribed . We are still in the dark ages re. curing disease.