To be worried about dd having the Cervical cancer jab after the fuss about it on here the other day

[Supervet]

DD is due to have it shortly in school.
I had not heard anything about it and presumed she would have it because cervical cancer is horrid.

Now I am really worried because there was lots of fuss over it the other day on here with many comments about serious side effects. I have now read it has been banned in Japan and there are worries elsewhere.

Can anyone point me in the right direction of accurate none scare mongering information or does anyone have any medical experience in relation to this?

drbadbride I was referring to the fact that some people are confused in thinking the vaccine protects you from getting CC. The vaccine is not designed for protecting people against CC but to protect them against contracting two of the HPV strains which may go on to trigger CC. They are two very different things.

Some people have said "it stops you getting CC". It clearly doesn't as there are many other strains of HPV. I'm just pointing out that some people have come to the wrong conclusion about what the vaccine does.

But it does significantly reduce your chances of getting cervical cancer. that's the point of the vaccine. As a shorthand, saying the hpv vaccine protects against cervical cancer is fine.

Given the vaccine has significantly reduced the number of hpv infections from the strains that cause 70% of cervical cancers being vaccinated reduces your individual chances of getting cervical cancer and a vaccination program will reduce rates of CC at a population level. It's the vaccination, not anything else that is responsible for that.

When I asked for evidence that the vaccine works, I was referring to my belief that the first group of women to have the jab in their teens are coming up to their 25th birthdays. If they take up the offer of smear test, will it prove the vaccine is working? I understand the number of women being diagnosed with CC is around 3000 a year, while the death rate hovers around 1000. Can we expect this number to fall?

The evidence from screening in STI clinics is that the number of HPV infections from the strains in the vaccine has reduced dramatically since the introduction of the vaccine. There is also evidence from countries other than the UK that the number of high grade abnormalities being picked up in routine smear tests in 20-24 year olds is falling.

Given that we know that 70% of cervical cancers are caused by these strains, the evidence suggests that we can certainly expect the number of CC cases to be reduced by the vaccine. It can take15-20 years for CC to develop from first infection, but at this point it would be quite odd if the vaccine had no effect on incidence of CC.

That Swedish study had women in their 30s, I think, maybe they had the jab optionally in their 20s. (confused)

The NHS has to go thru an exhaustive process of establishing clinical effectiveness before any vaccine gets rolled out for routine purposes. You can get knee-jerk short-term vaccine offered (like Swine Flu) when a bit of panic sets in among the powers that be, but for a rolling programme the evidence has to be very strong that it saves lives (and money).

DD had it about a year ago and had nothing other than a sore arm!

HPV fact sheets do not say that if you get it you'll get CC. That's completely untrue. They say it can lead to CC.

I should know, having had three HPV scares and lots of information on it.

But again, let's not let facts get in the way of our scaremongering.

I'm slightly confused by the Danish study. The authors claim they have shown a chronological link but not a causal link. But I can't see anything in the methodology or results in the link that shows they have.

Can you even make a chronological link if having symptoms that existed before having the vaccine, or started more than two months after the vaccine is part of the exclusion criteria for taking part in the study?

Oh Rafa, don't let common sense get in the way of a speculative article. .

I can't stop thinking how sporty the women/girls were in the Danish study. I'm reading articles to suggest that actually, a decent minority of Danish youth are inactive or obese. Suggests a strong association in getting POTS or recruitment bias in the observation study.

btw, I don't think there ever is such a thing as a fully informed decision. But there's definitely such a thing as a badly informed decision.

So what happens when the vaccine loses its effectiveness? I understand it can last up to 8 years. Do you opt for another jab? Is there a booster?

The fact sheet and letters we had from DDs school were very minimal and sketchy and weren't worded very well. For parents who didn't research further into it, they did skip the details and then asked for parental consent. It was a thin two sided pamphlet without much writing. They just asked for consent and it didn't even have anywhere for parents to write about medical history and allergies!

Tell me if I'm ?rong but read how this government Q and A leaflet is worded....

'...that will protect against cervical cancer'.

Angstyaunty, your username is most apt
Try scientific facts and real evidence rather than scaremongering

My DDs had it a couple of years ago and haven't shown any signs of adverse reaction.

But verbena the vaccine will protect against cervical cancer by preventing a girl from contracting the strains of the virus which cause 70% of all cervical cancers. Protection does not mean '100% guarantee of something not happening', it means 'doing all you can to reduce risk'. Condoms protect against pregnancy, but the protection is not 100%. A bulletproof vest protects you from gunshot wounds - unless of course you are shot in the head. There's no ambiguity in the leaflet, it's just that people misunderstand statistics and risk.

My DD1 had the jab(s) in yr8 - sore arm only. DD2 is going into Yr8, she will be having it too. We got an 8 page A4 booklet which was very comprehensive, not just a leaflet - I guess some areas are better at providing information than others.

Lifetime risk of developing CC is less than 1%.
Delaying sexual activity, using condoms, and delaying first pregnancy all lead to reduced risk.
The vaccine protects against some strains of HPV which are responsible for some cases of CC.
After vaccination screening is still necessary and will pick up and treat early abnormalities.
The benefits of vaccinating boys as well as girls are not considered to be cost effective.
There have been some studies and anecdotal evidence of side effects. The vaccine is fairly recent and as I understand it has been changed over time.
We have MS in the family and my DD have had overreactions to previous vaccines.
For me the benefits of the vaccine were not enough to persuade me to take what I considered to be an unknown risk in having DD vaccinated.

But I'm genuinely interested, lljkk. In case I'm missing something obvious.

Case study series are fine as a starting point as long as you don't overstretch your conclusions. But this looks suspiciously like they've chosen a methodology that deliberately excludes all the patients that would disprove what they wanted their conclusion to be.

I'm interested in whether if they had used all the patients with that set of symptoms the fact that they had higher than average activity levels would still hold. Because that might point to a very different disease mechanism.

I know of two girls. One sporty girl started fainting the day she had the HPV injection. The second girl was fragile with a chronic condition and it made her worse.

I developed POTS and neurocardiogenic syncope approximately one month after I had the MenC vaccination. I am 110% convinced that it had nothing to do with my MenC vaccination but everything to do with being an adolescent female.

The quadravalent HPV vaccine protects against a number of cancers, not just cervical, but cancers of the throat, mouth and neck, anus, and penis.

We were convinced enough of it's safety a efficacy that we have paid around £300 to have each of our sons vaccinated.

Like many doctors, DH is appalled at males being excluded from this vaccination program. He has seen first hand the very rapid rise in head and neck cancers- many caused by HPV.

I had it in 2008 and had no adverse effect. It had to be done in three separate injections ( I don't know if it still is) which actually helped me get over my needle phobia.

Something that hasn't been publicised about this vax is that when it was first introduced the brand cerviex (sp?) was used. Then after a few years they changed to gardasil, which had received bad press in USA due to some deaths.

I think it was pretty sneaky to convince people how safe the vax was based on evidence on the other brand then change the brand without telling anyone.

Things like this are why I'm cynical about anything the pro vax lobby tells us.

I'm dying of cervical cancer. It's painful and horrible. I'm leaving my 11 year old daughter without a mum.
The jab is so worth it! I wish I had of been around for me! ????

And ladypenny
I fly concur with brachytherapy being the worst experience of my life! (Especially as it didn't work!!)