All women and people with a cervix every five years now smear test

[justasking111]

Five years in Wales is this the norm in England, Scotland, Ireland?

Our surgery put it up on their FB page this week.

It was three years here last time I checked.

Yabu it's fine no reason to be concerned

Yanbu it's too big a gap.

Because they are a woman.

You're wrong that 'inclusive' language doesn't harm anyone.

It does. It mostly harms women.

It reduces them to their body parts rather than being wholly human.

It also harms people for whom English is not a first language or those who struggle with aspects of written English - it creates a confusion around something that does not need to be confused.

It harms me because every time I hear such rubbish it raises my blood pressure and makes me angry, spoiling my day and my hope for the future.

It priorities and platforms a particular ideology that I believe to be corporate driven and enormously harmful to women and children.

You are not just a walking cervix (although anyone walking around with a cervix is a woman)

not in my adult lifetime (age 70)

This was in the news this week, so I suspect the future will be self-sampling for HPV and then a smear if positive. I'm not happy with going through an invasive smear if they're not even going to look at the cells, so I'd be tempted to buy the self test privately.

Hi all - we appreciate that not everyone agrees with the wording in the title but we feel that this point has been made several times on this thread now and further posts like this will only derail the discussion. Thanks.

Fair enough. Back on the point - I think if upon cost benefit analysis it has been shown that 5 years is safe and reducing the frequency of this quite unpleasant test has no reduction in the cases of cervical cancer spotted then I'm okay with this.

We need to use the money in the NHS efficiently rather than 'because we've always done this'

I had my smear done last week and was told it's repeated yearly if you have the HPV virus (with no abnormal cells) otherwise it's 5 years (which I have to say I assumed was because I'm over 50).

It can be dormant though, so it is worth having it.

It's the lower age limit that bothers me. Used to be from whenever you started having sex. I had cervical cancer at 22. I can only assume it would have been a very bad outcome for me if i were born a few decades later.

Cervical cancer is actually all related to presence of HPV (virus) infection. 100% of women who have cervical cancer are HPV positive, that’s why the vaccine has essentially eradicated it. For women who are found to be HPV negative at smear, they can safely wait 5 years before being screened again. For women who are HPV positive, they need to be screened more frequently - likely yearly. So the arbitrary current 3 year gap for everyone isn’t fit for purpose anymore. Women need to be stratified into risk and non risk groups and followed up appropriately, only the non risk group would be screened 5 yearly, none of the 3000+ cases detected in a year would fall in this group. It’s just an update in science.

It’s been every 5 years in the Netherlands for ages

Exactly. 'People with a cervix' is gross. Talk about reducing women to their genitals. It's reductive and makes me think of Ed Gein.

I agree. One of the problems with catering to people's delusions is that biology doesn't know that you think you are a man in your head. You can still get cervical cancer. As long as they also state 'women'. Women and girls who often have been captured by social contagion from trans activists still need to have it reiterated that they are biologically women and are at risk of female cancers. 'Trans women' are typically middle aged men who know full wellbthey are middle aged men, as they have been married, had children andcstill hsve a penis. 'Trans men' are often vulnerable, often autistic girls. It does no harm to ensure they do not doubly suffer from their own delusions.

Amazing that some on MN can try derail a thread about women's healthcare with their anti trans politics.

No nous whatsoever.

I think that the HPV vaccination has made a wonderful change at the lower end of the age spectrum. There was never an organised screening system in the uk that started with sexual activity. https://acsjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/cncy.20203#:~:text=Cervical%20screening%20was%20introduced%20in,were%20frequently%20inadequately%20followed%20up.

Absolutely this. My friend 38 has had her second ablation this month. She's only slept with two men her fiance who did cheat, then the man she married.

Two lovers and she's got this hanging over her.

This is why she goes privately

@toadinthebucket im sorry that happened but so glad you were able to have screening. I'm 39 and it's been since 25 for me. Not sure when it changed then

Why are women under the age of 45 (and why not over) who have sex with men not given HPV vaccine?

Men who have sex with men are, irregardless of sexual activity before then.

OP, sorry in advance for all the transphobic replies you’re already receiving. MN sadly has at least one instance of transphobia every other day, I swear!

I think five years is a long time as the standard, but I suppose it would be case dependent and if there are other factors at play someone may be invited for one sooner

As men do not have a cervix there is no need to even mention them.

OMG Mumsnet warned you to zip it

Exactly. Although girls also have a cervix, they should not have smear tests so young.

After my last one where they said they just check for HPV and not cancer I'll not go again due to my circumstances.

OMG Mumsnet warned you