AIBU to not understand why this is not offered to women under 45?

[StripyHorse]

DD1 brought a letter home about the HPV vaccine. As I completed the form and explained to her what it was for she said that the boys also had a letter about it. I hadn't realised that boys are now included and being nosy, googled it.

What I also found out, is that it is offered to MSM (men who have sex with men) up to the age of 45 because 'they do not benefit indirectly from women being vaccinated'. I don't have an issue with this at all, I am all for anyone who is at risk being vaccinated.
www.nhs.uk/conditions/vaccinations/hpv-human-papillomavirus-vaccine/

I admit I do not know a huge amount about this, and someone may come on to explain that vaccinating women under 45 (who were too old for the vaccine when it was introduced) is not effective - in which case, fair enought.

But, if that is not the case, AIBU to think that if it is offered to men, it should also be offered to women?

This exact thread was posted a couple of days ago.

Link?

Was it? I certainly didn't post it but I apologise if I have duplicated what someone else posted, I certainly didn't mean to.

I asked my GP if I could have the vaccine when it first came out and she said it's only effective if given before you have sex.

bonzo you were HPV negative at the time of testing. That's not to say it's not lying dormant.
What's to stop my DC (Year 10 and 12) turning up to a GUM clinic, lying and saying they're MSM and getting the vaccine for free?

Google tells me that NHS started providing the vaccine to 12-13 year old girls in 2007 - do the oldest of those recipients is 26 years old.

I had it at school and I'm 29 now, so maybe more women are covered than we think?

I work in sexual health. Yes, a 40 year old MSM is more at risk for complications related to HPV than a 40 year old woman. The issues of cancer are similar (anal vs cervical cancer, though women can get anal cancer too). But the risks related to ongoing HPV infection are greater for MSM having multiple non-monogamous relationships, for example, heightened risk of HIV infection. Most women in their 30s and 40s are with one partner or using condoms with casual partners; most MSM are not. So risks are potentially greater and complications are greater.

Realistically, most women by the time they reach 30 already have HPV. Most men probably do as well. There is the catch up programme for women. But in a very constrained budget, resources are directed where they can produce the greatest impact and that’s rightly MSM if we’re talking about vaccinating adults.

Thankfully now all children will get vaccinated as routine (well, minus the anti vaxxer ones ) and the next generation won’t have to worry about these things.

@cptartapp from what I read last night your boys should be able to get the vaccine through the gp upto 25 years old. No need to lie, they should be able to get it on the nhs.
My boys are year 9 and year 11 so the younger one only just missed out as it is now offered to boys and girls in year 8, I will be looking into this for them

As well as MSM I noticed trans men and trans women who have sex with men can also get it on the nhs up to 45.

In that case the thing to do is to tell your GP you are a transman and get the vaccine that way.

So assuming I’ve not had HPV, is there any value in my getting vaccinated? I’m married and we are both monogamous.

How do you think you'd get it if you are both monogamous?

Cervical cancer rates increasing

Among the cohort who have not been vaccinated. And the Independent has a shameful anti-vacc history.

A different view.

PP said cervicsal cancer rates are increasing, but on the news this week, they had an article about how the cervical cancer rate has decreased dramatically.

Something like a 75% decrease since vaccination started, and set to continue to fall as the vaccinated cohort get older.

It is one of the most effective vaccination stories we have!

Oh didn't see CountFoscos post!

From CountFrosco's link:

Researchers said the vaccine has nearly wiped out cases of cervical pre-cancer in young women since an immunisation programme was introduced 10 years ago.

They found the vaccine had led to a 90% cut in pre-cancerous cells.

And they said the effects of the programme had "exceeded expectations".

Mindutopia

Lots of people aren't anti Vax but refuse to get the hpb vaccine for lots of reasons.

To do with studies on efficacy, the countries around the world questioning it and moral objections. These people vaccinate but leave out the hpv one.

Hpv not hpb.

I have seen a lot of moral objections to the hpv vaccine.

the line seems to be that if people don't have sex before marriage and were faithful, then the vaccine wouldn't be necessary.

meanwhile in the real world....

Fiddlers but there is no catch up campaign?

I understand it that only those who missed it in year 8 'after Sept 2019' when the programme was introduced can have it up to age 25. Not any male up to age 25? Unlike the Men ACWY vaccine where there was a catch up campaign.

I'm a practice nurse too, so particularly interested in this, and we have had no information saying we will be able to vaccinate any male up to 25 who has never had it. Women yes. But there's no catch up for the males as they are though to be more protected with females of similar age having had the vaccine, i.e., herd immunity.

I was one of the earliest to receive it in 1997 but I was just past uni & took advantage of a catch-up program.

Australia has been able to almost eradicate cervical cancer because the take up was so strong. They’ve also now ditched two yearly pap smears in favour of 5 yearly HPV tests.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-45727977

2007 sorry, not 1997

Some latest research from Spain has shown that HPV vaccination provides protection against abnormal cell changes even if you have HPV virus. So now they have made it available to women up to the age of 45 if they pay for it. So you can nip to Boots or Superdrug and have the three injections for a payment. I have HPV and have had CIN3, a biopsy and other cell changes since that. I booked myself in quick smart for the injections and paid for them myself. My DS is in Yr 8 now and has just caught the NHS programme and my DD will also be first in the queue for this jab. What I don’t understand is why 45 years old. What happens at 46? Surely there is benefit at any age. I think they will increase the age soon. I just about slipped in. And as to why the NHS don’t cover it - will be money.

I was one of the early people to have it (I think the first year it was introduced)

Recently I had to go for a colposcopy due to concerns. My smear came back hpv positive. I've been married for 7 years as well with no risk of stds ( have been checked regularly for various reasons; pregnancy, abnormal discharge)

The nurse explained it is not a sexually transmitted disease but is contracted during intimate touching. It can live in you dormant for many years and when your run down it will show. She also said that hpv has many different strains but there are a few that can cause cell changes that can lead to cervical cancer and the vaccine protects against those specific strains.

So you can be hpv positive and it might never turn into anything nasty, your body can normally fight off the virus as well.

I do think that the vaccine should be available to everyone even if they have been sexually active as a way of eradicating those specific nasty strains.

Btw I'm not a medical professional but I thought it might be helpful to share what my experience was and what I had found out from it.

@its2019ffs yes this is what I understood as well when I went through my biopsy etc. That you can have HPV and it can kick into life it your immunity dips. This is why I have had the injections because any help my body can get to fight it I will take.

I'm not an expert either but my last smear test a couple of years ago included testing for the strains of HPV that are linked to cancer (I tested negative) and I did wonder if I should request the HPV vaccine then. Sadly I didn't follow up - it wouldn't have been free in any case as I was in the USA.

On a cost versus efficacy basis I can see that for women in their forties it would be inefficient to offer free HOV vaccinations but if a woman wants to be tested for the relevant HPV strains and is negative then I would think the option of getting the vaccine should be considered. TBH I think the decision makers on these things at the NHS probably assume that a woman in her forties won't have many more sex partners in her life so the statistical risk is low. Just my completely uninformed guess!