A Necessary Vaccine

[Margaret33]

This supports what I have posted. How does it differ?

… nor have you provided a source stating direct causastion has been established.

It does not support what you posted, as you stated (in bold) “direct causation has not been demonstrated.”

The source and material posted establish the direct causation. How you consider it to be anything less… I have no idea. But I do wish you well nonetheless…

Peace & blessings,
Margaret

 

[astegallrnc]

It does not support what you posted, as you stated (in bold) “direct causation has not been demonstrated.”

The source and material posted establish the direct causation. How you consider it to be anything less… I have no idea.

I know you don’t. As that national Cancer Institute states, direct causation has not been established.

The information I posted in linked to the National Cancer Institute. You have not cited resources stating there is direct causation.

 

[timotheos]

Quote:
If the CDC, FDA and NIH call it a precancer, I tend to believe it.

Precancer is a condition that tends to become malignant. Cervical dysplasia is a precancer.
Once cervical cells begin to change, it typically takes 10-15 years before invasive cervical cancer develops. As the cells change, they first become “pre-cancerous” - a condition also known as “dysplasia” or CIN - the abbreviation for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Dysplasia is the medical term for abnormal cells on the cervix caused by the HPV virus. If the abnormalities are mild and few in number, they usually go away without treatment. However, some cases of moderate dysplasia, and most cases of severe dysplasia, will not go away on their own. At this stage, the cells are considered “pre-cancer”: In other words, if they are not found and treated, they could develop into cervical cancer.

This is subject is too hard to discuss, with the wealth of half-truths out there being brandished by even well-meaning posters. So I will leave this thread with the following thought:

If cervical dysplasia is a precancer, and we see an incidence of dysplasia of at least 1% consistently (even in our squeaky clean neck of the woods), and women make up about 150 million of the US population, with a very conservative minimum of 1/4 of these in the Pap age population, we would expect at least 400,000 cervical cancers in the US per year, and probably more. In fact, we saw 10,520 in 2004. So this discrepancy needs explaining given the rhetoric, which is all I have intended to do. I wish for everyone to find the whole truth. And for the record I, for one, have never felt the government, or private business, had a corner on the truth market.

Peace and adieu to all on this thread, Timotheos

 

[astegallrnc]

half-truths out there being brandished by even well-meaning posters

For the record, no half-truths from me. I managed ab paps for living… once upon a time… and there is enough confusion without me adding to it.

If cervical dysplasia is a precancer, and we see an incidence of dysplasia of at least 1% consistently (even in our squeaky clean neck of the woods), and women make up about 150 million of the US population, with a very conservative minimum of 1/4 of these in the Pap age population, we would expect at least 400,000 cervical cancers in the US per year, and probably more. In fact, we saw 10,520 in 2004. So this discrepancy needs explaining given the rhetoric, which is all I have intended to do. I wish for everyone to find the whole truth. And for the record I, for one, have never felt the government, or private business, had a corner on the truth market.

There are about 600,000 cervical precancers every year. Treatment is effective. Most women diagnosed with cervical cancer have not had a pap within the last 5 years and many of these women have never had a Pap test according to the ACS. Although a woman is diagnosed with dysplasia, this does not mean she will definitely develop cervical cancer.

For those interested in the significance of dysplasia, see Myth #5 for more information.

 

[astegallrnc]

Ok, kids are in bed, so let me see if I can explain this.

The source and material posted establish the direct causation.

The criteria to establish direct causation have not been met. “While not all of the criteria proving causation have been established, cervical cancer begins with sexual transmission of HPV to a woman susceptible to persistent infection” (Burk, 1999). Burk & DeSalle (2006) state “[t]he final link in the etiologic trail of HPV and cervical cancer is about to be tested. The availability and widespread use of prophylactic vaccines for HPV16 and HPV18 , with an anticipated two-thirds reduction in cervical cancer incidence in vaccinated women, will be the final fulfillment of Hill’s criteria, as previously discussed”.

Others question the link for various reasons. There are some who question the “link” between genital HPV and cervical cancer (i. e., Duesberg & Schwartz), and others who point out there are co-factors (smoking, OC, etc.). Of course, there are the rare cases of cervical cancer without HPV that raise questions.

I do understand why this is confusing with so many sources stating genital HPV is “the cause”, but there is more research to be done.

With all of this said, there is a strong link between genital HPV and cervical cancer, and this vaccine is promising IMO. I just encourage anyone considering this vaccine to carefully consider the information.

If anyone has a question regarding the information I have posted, contact me. I can cite several sources (including primary sources).

 

[magician]

Margaret33;1965002:

Hi Margaret33-

I completely understand, and what it comes down to is a personal choice, for you, your daughter, or anyone else. But if you jump in, jump in with your eyes open. Do you know how long the immunity is good for? Do you know what oncogenic HPV virotypes the current vaccine does not cover? Do you know that, even if vaccinated, you may still acquire an HPV infection, get dysplasia, and require a Pap to detect and treat this infection before it may lead to cancer?

A well developed and tested vaccine is a great approach to preventing disease, HPV included. But from what I have seen, the immunity may not last more than a few years, so you better be compulsive about finding if boosters will be required. Also, I know that other HPV virotypes are present in our community that are not covered by this current vaccine, so you would be wise not to think the shot will be the cure-all.

Last, I too have seen the rhetoric about “HPV is a precancer”. This statement incites panic. It is a potential

precancer. I don’t have a compilation of sources, but probably less than 1% of HPV infections would lead to cancer even if undetected and untreated. True, HPV is considered a necessary factor in cervical carcinogenesis, and I am not downplaying its importance. But it’s not like once you’re infected, now you’re going to get cancer.

Peace (and sigh), Timotheos

I will ask you again: Please cite your sources. So far, you have failed to do that which suggests that you’re making up your own “data”.

For instance, where do you get this one???
“But from what I have seen, the immunity may not last more than a few years”
What exactly have you seen? What data do you have?
The fast answer is that you have none. The slow answer is that you’re attempting to insert your own unobjective opinion into data and research where it has no business being.

Here’s another one:
“I don’t have a compilation of sources, but probably less than 1% of HPV infections would lead to cancer even if undetected and untreated.”
Where did you obtain that information? You’re making this up as you go along methinks.

 

[jman507]

I will ask you again: Please cite your sources. So far, you have failed to do that which suggests that you’re making up your own “data”.

For instance, where do you get this one???
“But from what I have seen, the immunity may not last more than a few years”
What exactly have you seen? What data do you have?
The fast answer is that you have none. The slow answer is that you’re attempting to insert your own unobjective opinion into data and research where it has no business being.

Here’s another one:
“I don’t have a compilation of sources, but probably less than 1% of HPV infections would lead to cancer even if undetected and untreated.”
Where did you obtain that information? You’re making this up as you go along methinks.

Well I’m thinking since this has only been tested in humans for so long, it would be impossible to know by experimental proof that it provides long term immunity. If boosters will need would still need to be looked into.

 

[H_Opey]

It is not a necessary vaccine. It could also cause the cancer if it is given to a person who has the HPV. They are also investigating to see if birth defects have been caused by the ones who were vaccinated.
My opinion, NO WAY!
People also contract HPV and fight it off without ever getting cervical cancer.

all.org/article.php?id=10931&PHPSESSID=41f9ca93fc8a9ac9029bf5a48a26103c

 

[itsjustdave1988]

Wasn’t the HPV vaccine developed from aborted fetal tissue, and if so, how does this effect the morality of benefitting from this vaccine?

 

[mamanicky]

I heard that if parents oppose the vaccine, they cannot send their children to public school.

Legally, they cannot do that, especially if it goes against religious beliefs. I remember a boy at my highschool carried some sort of ritual knife at all times. it was part of his religious beliefs, and the school had to allow it. Schools cannot even make native American boys cut their hair to meet dress code regulations, as it is a cultural symbol.

 

[H_Opey]

Mamanicky,
There are two states, MS and W Virginia (I think) that do not have exemptions from vaccinations because of religious beliefs.