not to have known that HPV vaccine could be beneficial at my age (45)?

I agree. Before calling a private clinic - who have now booked me in despite being over the age of 45 for £175 - I called my local NHS sexual health clinic. They said they would only give it to women up to age 25. After that age, they only administer it to men who have sex with men.

Thank you for starting this thread. I’ve only just come across it and have ended up down an HPV rabbit hole.

I’ve attended sexual health clinics regularly for years, always had routine STI screening before new partners, and not once was I told that private HPV vaccination is available beyond the school programme. I was even told by the nurse who does my smears that the vaccine isn’t suitable for people over 26. Had I known it was an option, I would absolutely have paid for it years ago.

This feels particularly frustrating given that I had two LLETZ procedures in my early 20s for CIN 2. I cleared that HPV infection long ago, but that doesn’t protect me from reinfection or from other high-risk strains. Having a hot loop of wire taken to my cervix is not an experience I’m keen to repeat.

Condoms don’t reliably prevent HPV, oral transmission is common, and HPV isn’t routinely tested for outside cervical screening. Withholding information about the only form of primary prevention from sexually active adults isn’t informed choice. It’s a systemic failure.

Jst bumping this thread, as I am about to book the HPV vaccine (a little over age 45) and found the thread during a search. I am just waiting on a private clinic locally to come back to me to say they will give it to me off licence (I think they will).

I don't have HPV according to last smear, but I only just realised this vaccine is open to adults and so I am bloody well having it. Even if I have to fib about my age to get it.

Anyway, bumping so more eyes see 👀

Interesting, I asked my gynecologist about it a few years ago (I'm not in the UK) and she said there was no benefit for me.

My younger sister who is early 30s was the first cohort offered this so women aged 35-45 are likely to have been too old to have it the first time around.

Thanks for posting this, Op. I also found out a few weeks ago that HPV can be introduced via masturbation (from your hands) and that is one reason why smears are recommended until age 65 even if you are no longer sexually active (the other reason being reactivation of a dormant virus).

I asked my private GP about having it privately, and she said no evidence it is effective in over 35s so no point! Was I misled?!

@hpvandmeI just wanted to thank you again for this thread. I've booked in now for the first vaccine (I think I'll need two doses).

Oh at that stage it was 3 vaccines as well. At school now they only have one as that's just as effective as three doses. Not sure if that's for all ages.

@hpvandme I'm not sure why I looked into it. This was before DC were old enough to get the vaccine so I hadn't received any 'prompts'.

I'd lost DH and on reading about the HPV vaccine and if it was 'worth having' before, and in case I met someone else, most of the literature I read was from the USA. I know then have a different criteria for to health insurance etc.

Anyway it boils down to yes I understand most people would have acquired HPV at some point as they age, but as we all know there are many strains of HPV, so it doesn't make sense to say we would have encountered all strains. I think the cut of age of 45 is wrong too. Yes I guess if you're with the one partner for life, it's unlikely to get HPV but not everyone is. I do think it's ageist. They just look at risk and apply it to everyone.

When I went privately, I could have given any date of birth, they have nothing to check it against. They gave me the record of the vaccine if I wanted to send that to my GP.

Gosh this is expensive. But I think I will look into it!

@hpvandme this is an interesting article and useful to read. Unfortunately data and scientific papers can be difficult to decipher and the “headlines” are not always as clear as what they say.

Whilst you’re right the study suggests that HPV in older aged women is more linked with a reinfection it is important to note that there is no actual way to say whether or not a “reinfection” is actually a reinfection or the same infection that you previously couldn’t detect. The study actually states themselves. They have “estimated” what a reinfection is by calling anyone who has previously had HPV previously, that they didn’t detect for an average of 1.5 years and then later did find HPV- even if it was the same type they previously had they call this a reinfection. We know that this not how it works as they themselves have written:

“Even with today's highly sensitive PCR protocols to detect HPV DNA the possibility remains that the apparent clearance of HPV infections may simply reflect that viral load dipped below the threshold of detectability.”

“We called initial or first infections as any episode with a type the woman had not harbored before. We also used the term re-infections loosely, to denote infections that we qualified as “with the same type” or “with a different type” occurring in women with an initial infection at the early visits in the cohort. Proper characterization of a truly incident HPV infection event would have required that we observed the cohort from the onset of sexual exposure, an impractical proposition in most settings.”

Also the average age of women at recruitment into the study was 32 so what they consider a “initial infection” may actually be a reactivation or reinfection as those women may well have had HPV infection prior to enrollment in the study.

Moreover This study does not even give women the HPV vaccine so we have no idea what effect if any actually being given the vaccine would have on people who have already been exposed to the virus. That’s the reason why it’s not given as routine to people over the age of 12 because the vaccine is known to prevent you being infected with the virus but there is not strong evidence yet that it will help your immune system clear it quicker if you have already been exposed.

It makes it very difficult to make clear cut conclusions. As a rule when reading scientific papers if you read the limitations section which they all should have it gives you an idea of what confounders there are in their study design and how it may not actually be applicable to real life.

i agree it’s an area that requires more research and also agree that as a HPV vaccine is relatively safe there is no harm in self sourcing one to keep yourself as protected as you can be but don’t think think this one paper shows that reinfection is higher in people who are older - it shows that they found more HPV - after periods of not finding it in women who were older - that to me doesn’t equate to reinfection - and we cannot extrapolate that the vaccine will be of benefit. Whilst there’s no harm in an individual trying it out, you can see why the nhs wouldn’t undergo an expensive vaccination programme when there is no evidence it would work when there is already a robust screening programme in place and a vaccination programme in place for groups where it is clear it will be helpful. Everything needs to be costed and proven to be cost effective when the model is it’s 100% paid for by the taxpayer and free at point of care.

My DD got the vaccine after several LETZ procedures and irregular smears in her 30s. She paid £500 and luckily, it kick started her immune system. Now clear of HPV but resultant treatment caused a shortened cervix and problems in pregnancy leading to careful monitoring and then emergency c section.

Amazing thank you for sharing this!

Thank you for this, OP, I didn't know.

I am mid-thirties and newly divorced. We were each other's first and only. And I was too old for the HPV vaccine on the NHS, when it was first introduced.
So it sounds like the vaccine could be a very good move for me as and when I start to date new people. I will definitely start saving up (from a quick Google it's around £180 per dose and I'd need two).

I asked about having it in my mid 20s and was told by the nurse I’m not sure if it would have any benefit. It’s actually really difficult to get a straight answer.

Didn’t know we could have it in our 40s

I obviously didnt have it at school because it didnt exist

I got it at 30. I can’t remember what made me decide to do I but at nearly £500 I assume the govt don’t want women to realise they could benefit as then they’ll want it paid for! Women’s healthcare is a joke sometimes

Thanks this is so helpful to hear. I’ve been debating getting it for a few years but every nurse I’ve spoken to didn’t explain it would be beneficial. I will now get it.

I've had the HPV vaccine. Until I read up on it I thought it was too late.

It's unfortunate it's only given to teens but I guess the cut off has to be somewhere and cost has to be taken into account. Like everything it's best given before any contact.

Gay & bisexual men can get the vaccine on the NHS up to the age of 45. Why not women? Personally I think women should be given the choice to have it, if that's why they want, too.

I currently have HPV and have been tempted to get the vaccine after reading that ‘it might’ kick your body into fighting it off but I don’t think there is any real proof that it does or that it protects against existing dormant infections . And it’s not cheap. I’d pay any money if it was guaranteed.
i think gay men get it for free .

If it can protect against ‘reactivation’ of any previous strain why isn’t it available to all sexually active women regardless? Especially given it’s so common.