The 'Promiscuity Jab'?

[Diamondback]

Argh, argh, argh, must stop looking at the Daily Mail as it always makes me cross, but today they were banging on about the HPV Vaccination again and stated that 'some refer to it as the Promiscuity Jab'.

Some? Who? Only the Daily Mail as far as I know. Good God, how many people here were virgins on their wedding nights? How many people working for the Daily Mail were? Do they really think we shouldn't protect our daughters?

And I don't recall getting the Rubella jab at twelve and thinking 'oh that's alright then, I'll go and get pregnant now I'm not going to damage my baby.' Why would we assume that little girls will be thinking 'i'll just go have unprotected sex now that there's a lower risk of my developing cervical cancer.' As if!

Gaaah! I just wish the Daily Mail would stop living in a fantasy world where we all still think our little girls will be virgins on their wedding nights and their DH's too.

Yup probably. A white, middle aged man who isn't going to get cock cancer!

What beats me is why mothers buy into this promiscuous shite. My DS has survived cancer. I'd do anything to stop him getting it again. Obviously some parents do think that sex is worse than death.

very very sad isnt it????

This is reason no 9,99999 to suggest the Daily Wail is a crap paper that hates women - I really cannot understand why any woman would read this horrible rag.

The HPV virus affects many women, straight, lesbian and bi. You can pick it up just by indulging in what used to be called "heavy petting" - sigh - with no penetration. Since most women on this site are mothers, and therefore almost by definition will have had sex, most will be exposed to the the virus, in the same way most of us are exposed to the flu virus, but not all of us will become ill.

It is also worth remembering that although HPV is implicated in most cervical cancers, elimination of the virus will not totally eliminate cancers of the cervix and surrounding tissues, so women even if vaccinated should continue to be vigilant.

As a survivor of cervical cancer, I will just say that I don't feel any shame about being a normal sexually active woman and neither should anyone else. What would make me very angry indeed and ashamed of our culture is for a life saving vaccination to be denied to young women because of some bizarre and misogynistic ideas.

It really surprises me that people think the hpv vaccine prevents cancer. It does not. It prevents against some strains of hpv which may lead to cancer. A very small percentage of people with hpv will go on to develop cancer but a larger percentage of women with cervical cancer had hpv. Hpv does not = cancer. The hpv vaccine does not prevent cancer. I really worry about the false sense of security that this vaccine is promoting. Much better to inform your children, take precautions and have regular smears. No vaccine is 100% effective.

As I spend a large part of my working day doing HPV tests,regular screening high risk HPV, type 16 &18 very high risk HPV and so called low risk HPV I am definatley getting my 14 year old Dd vaccinated (shes going for her second shot in the series in a couple of weeks). Ive seen girls as young as 15 with full blown cervical cancer and EVERY ONE is caused by/contributed to HPV. To not get this shot for your daughter ( and now available for your sons) is plain daft. This virus causes a lot of mouth and throat cancers and rectal/anal cancers .I get a lot of anal samples from gay males and its really prevalent . People need this vaccine, and not just teenage girls. Get your sons vaccinated also.

OP, I can't read the entire thread as I will get too riled. I agree totally with everything you're saying (especially wrt the rubella jab).

My Mum thinks that the HPV jab will encourage teenage girls to have sex. She's actually said that word for word

In my experience teenage girls will have sex if they want to have sex, and jab isn't going to change that.

bubbleymummy - the HPV vaccine can help prevent cancers that may be triggered by the HPV virus. It's not a catch all vaccine for cervical cancer (obviously) but it could significantly reduce the risk of cervical cancer (and other cancers- I think theoldtrout has covered the point well)

Google maxillofacial cancer for extra horrifying images.

Why anybody would refuse their teenage children the right to have this particular vaccine is beyond me (other vaccines with small children I understand, rubella and HPV vaccine I don't)

Sorry,just read bubleymummy,s thread. Shes right,the vaccine does not prevent cancer. It prevents HPV. HPV is sooooo out there,in this day and age most people who are sexually active have had it, the thing with HPV is that ,as its a virus, you can clear it from your system very easily and most people do. The trouble starts when you dont clear it, It is sitting there on your cervix,or where ever, and slowly begins to change the cells .These "changed" cells are what causes/becomes the cancer.The vaccine does protect against genotypes 16 and 18 among others,but as 16 and 18 alone cause 70% of cervical cancers there is a very high chance youll dodge that bullet.In all my years of running these tests Ive only ever seen 2 cases of cervical cancer,full blown, that was not directly attributed to an HPV infection.The pathologyst reckons that they were caused by one of the "low risk" types that wasnt being tested for

Dont mean to sound preachy but its something Im passionate about

So everyone should still be using condoms. The spermicide on them was found to have some virus killing effect, as well as being a physical barrier to STD.

I didnt know the vaccine was available to boys too, will get mine done when they are old enough then. If everyone is done then it will eradicate HPV and that can only be a good thing.

Get them the one that protects against genital warts as well, redflag. That's what all the GPs I know have done.

Stupid, damaging hyperbole from the Mail. I know the reporter who wrote that story. IRL he's quite a decent bloke. God knows what goes on in his head when he agrees to write crap like that. Tbh, I doubt his private life lives up to the ridiculous 1950s morality of the Mail.

edam, I'm guessing what goes through his head when he writes it is 'paycheque'. Doesn't he have any morals? He's condemning young women to die of cancer by encouraging stupid people to prevent their daughters having the vaccination. He is actually killing people.

And oldtrout - thanks for that info on other cancer risks associated with HPV - lets get our sons done too! As soon as my DD is old enough (she's still baking at the mo) I'll be taking her to get the private jab, which also protects against the strain of HPV that causes genital warts. I won't have her suffer serious illness, or mildly embarassing illness, because I'm a squeamish mummy who wants to pretend my DD will never have sex.

On a happy note though, no-one agreeing with the Daily Mail [hgrin]

against genital warts too? Getting it as soon as they can, thats great!

My DH and I had a disagreement about this vaccine when it was first reported. I said something along the lines of 'yet another jab for the girl', he said firmly that she wouldn't be getting it. His reasoning was that she would probably save herself until she got married, to which I replied 'like we did'. He is so protective of our DD that he really did think she wouldn't become sexually active or at least if she did, it would be with someone 'nice'. what a prick. We have agreed that DD will be getting any vax which will save her (or at least help to protect her) against cancer and warts.
He generally leaves me to take care of the medical appts and decisions about her health care, but this time he was adamant she wouldn't have it. Bad luck MrKree

slightly off topic, but my DD was really ill after first round (fever /vomiting /etc)- anyone know if this is likely to happen with the 2nd and 3rd ones she is due to have - am tempted to withdraw consent.

Madsad, could be coincidence, of course. Did they give your dd any literature that details possible side effects? Or you could look them up online on a reputable site like Cancer Research UK.

I spoke to one of the leading researchers on this, who has had the jab herself (even though it's less effective in adults who have already most likely been exposed to HPV she thought it was worth it). She pointed out it has been given to millions of people in several different countries and has proved very safe. (Although of course when you are treating millions of people, you do get a handful who become ill because in a population of millions, some are bound to get ill anyway, whether or not they had a jab.)

Most common side effects are redness and soreness at the site of the injection as with other jabs. And there's been a bit of silliness in schools, as you get when teenagers are lined up for a jab - I remember boys fainting in the line for TB when I was a teen myself. Us girls were made of far sterner stuff.

Can any of those who have been involved in HPV research clear something up for me please.
I've done a lot of reading about the subject, my interest was piqued by a thread on here months ago, I have read that some (U.S) research has shown that genital warts aren't necessarily caused by purely sexual contact, mainly because there seems to be plenty of children who have been found to have them with no incidence of sexual abuse and also because the wart virus can survive on surfaces and even towels etc.

It just makes me wonder how many people have been infected and automatically assumed an unfaithful partner when that may not be the case?

I'm copying and pasting something I wrote (under an old user name) on a thread in Vaccinations about the difference between Cervarix and Gardisil - and about potential protection against genital warts...

The two vaccines are not the same in terms of their cervical cancer protection.

Cervarix is clinically proven to have cross-protection against cancer-causing cerotypes other than those included in the vaccine, as well as being clinically proven to have sustained protection, which is what you need in a cervical cancer vaccine.

Gardisil does not have the same proven cross- or sustained-protection.

If your priority is cancer, then go for Cervarix. If your priority is a little less cancer protection and protection against genital warts, then go for Gardisil. Genital warts may be a fast-growing STD, but it's worth bearing in mind that it affects less than 1% of the female population. Plus it doesn't kill. Cervical cancer kills.

If you give a cervical vaccine at the age of 10, you want assurance that it's going to last the distance - only one of them offers clinically proven sustained protection (the other may well offer it, but it's not proven).

Just saying - that in case people think they offer the same protection. They don't, and it's important to be aware of the differences, so as to make an informed choice. [hsmile]

I feel super guilty as I was a tad free with my favours, then had to have a cone biopsy. to this day I wonder if it was my fault.

clearly it was!!!!

The vaccine was added to the standard program here in Holland as of this year - my DD will be automatically offered it when she turns 12. The good folk at the DM must love that, an entire country full of government backed promiscuous young women.

The DM normally reports crap so no suprise here. How will this jab make anyone promiscous? I can't think of a single person who decided to use protection for the sole reason of "it may stop me getting cervical cancer at some point in the future". What a load of rubbish.

madsad This is only anecdotal but when I had the HPV vaccine (I'm young enough to be included in the catch up program) the first jab made me feel quite ill. I wasn't actually sick but I felt it and quite a few others from my class ended up going home after throwing up. It didn't happen after the 2nd and 3rd vaccine, everyone (as far as I know) was fine apart from a sore arm. I guess its possible that it could happen again to your daughter but if she hasn't reacted badly to any other vaccinations chances are she will be fine after the other 2. Everyone reacts to a vaccine slightly differently so its impossible to say for sure.

5dollarshake - thanks for the info. I knew there was one that did warts and one that didn't, but I didn't realise that the warty one didn't give as definite protection against cancer.

The one offered through schools is the anti cancer (but not anti-warts) one. Hopefully by the time DD is old enough, they'll have ironed these issues out.