Vaccination against cervical cancer/HPV

[nooshoo]

This vaccination protects against a sexually transmitted virus which can lead to cancer and other problems. Does anyone know why is it recommended as standard for children from 11 years, is it because there is perceived realistic risk of sexual contact occuring from this age?

The posters making various bonkers claims

What claims by posters were bonkers? None.
I noticed most of your posts were bonkers though 👀

Brother has passed his 5 years clear thankfully, I'm at year 3 but fingers crossed. Thx

@nooshoo - the problem with your argument is you’ve taken that it can be given from aged 11 to mean it is. It can be - particularly if that fits in with when children are having other jabs, but in the UK it’s routinely given in year 8 or 9 (year 8 is 12-13 and year 9 13-14). It is still given at an age it’s most likely children won’t be sexually active yet, but by 14 years you are often not far off for many.

The age of 11 is when it’s safe and appropriate to give. I don’t know why it’s not just rolled into the younger jab schedule and get it out of the way, presume it works better in older children.

Hello @nooshoo, is English your first language? It seems you don't understand the meaning of before?

before
Preposition, adverb, or conjunction (it depends on how it's used in a sentence)

Before means earlier than or in front of.

“I brush my teeth before breakfast.”
→ I brush my teeth earlier than when I eat breakfast.

“B comes before C in the alphabet.”
→ B comes earlier in the order.

"She arrived before lunch."
→ Earlier than lunch.

"Doctors recommend getting the HPV vaccine before becoming sexually active to ensure maximum protection against the virus."
→ You get the vaccine earlier than when you might be exposed to the virus (for example, by having intimate or sexual contact).

HTH 👋

But you understand that if everyone thought the way that you do that no one would get vaccinated, right? You did not disclose this history when you said your child didn't get the vaccine. You also did not state whether you child has other illnesses that made a reaction to the vaccine more likely etc etc. The chances of having that kind of reaction are very very small. Far smaller than the risks of getting and suffering through the many cancers that the HPV vaccine can prevent. It's also going to be very important to explain to your child that they are not vaccinated and, given they have long term illnesses, they are even more vulnerable to contracting the types of illnesses that the HPV vaccine is intended to prevent. They will also need to know that they could contract the virus without knowing, and pass it on without knowing - so they will need to practice safe sex - and, sadly, even avoid intimate contact like kissing etc unless they and their chosen partners take regular tests to see whether they have HPV or not.

Of course I will make them fully aware that they aren’t vaccinated and to be as safe as they can be .

My son was 13 when he had his, the schedule starts at s1 in Scotland so when the kids move to secondary school so most children here will be 12. My son didn’t get it in the first round as he didn’t know what it was and freaked out a bit.

ironic given I’m a vaccinator - younger kids not his age group. But we sat down and had a good chat about it, what it’s for/why it’s given etc and he decided he would have it. He then got it in the next round of vaccines and just recently got the second one. You don’t always need to have it at 11/12 but not sure what difference it makes as long as they are protected if that’s their/your choice.

@nooshoo in the UK, children aren’t given in at 11. They are offered it in year 8, when they are 12 or 13.

My first response was simply in reply to someone asking if the schools check with children whose parents didn’t consent to see if they wanted to consent for themselves so I didn’t need to add more information about my personal situation at that point I only
added that when asked more about it

I find it difficult to believe this is a genuine question.

Surely a few moments thought would lead one to reason that the age needs to be set low enough to catch children before sexual activity begins. This will naturally be at least a couple of years before a reasonable number of young people become sexually active. At no point is anyone suggesting that most children are having sex at 11.

Where I live it is offered at 12 or 13. Again, this does not mean anyone thinks it is ok to have sex at that age, or that anyone thinks the majority of children are doing so.

Thank goodness - I am sorry you are being confronted in this post by what must be very distressing/triggering posts involving people deciding not to protect their children. Not only did you have to endure the terrible treatments you needed to use, but you have that constant "what if" worry...and the check ups and being on high alert for symptoms etc. I hope other people listen when you tell them about your experience and take steps to protect their kids.

^this Maybe Op thought 13 doesn't sounds a salacious as 11?

But something tells me perhaps op didn't post entirely in good faith😇

HNRTT. This seems quite a puzzling thread but has anyone posted any research papers?

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10399474/

There might seem to be a question concerning the UK's approach to screening though.

That age gives the best immune response, (between 9 and 14) it's not because they think they will be sexually active. But obvi it is most effective when its given before any exposure. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41541-022-00458-0

The smear test checks for HPV these days which is what causes cervical cancer. If all young people are vaccinated against HPV they wouldn't need to do them.

Most of us over 35 will not have been vaccinated therefore still need to test.

You seem to not like the program but it saves lives.

Tres provocative. Just in case you really think like this, you are selfish beyond belief. Hope it's a troll.

Approx 8% of cervical cancers are non hpv related and they now unfortunately go undetected till it’s harder to treat as smears only check for hpv they don’t look at the cells unless you’re hpv positive

No, it's not that it's understood that a majority of 12 year olds are sexually active. Just that a significant minority are or soon will be. If you waited to give the vaccine until a tipping point where a majority where sexually active then it would be ineffective for up to 50% of the children being given it. If you give the vaccine at an age where maybe 1% are sexually active, then it has a chance to be effective for 99%. So you don't wait until a majority are sexually active...

I’m not a troll and my gp was the one who mentioned herd immunity to us to reassure us

Well, the fact you said that "you will" means that you actually haven't yet done so. Meaning they aren't aware of either the risks to themselves, or the risk they may post to others. Given this virus can be passed just by kissing someone else that's pretty negligent on your part. Also the only way to make them as them "as safe as they can be" is to give them the vaccine. You haven't done that. It appears you also haven't fully informed them of the risks, and their own right to get the vaccine if they want to - whether you consent or not. Maybe you should do some research into what happens when people get cervical; head/neck/throat; vaginal/vulval; penile; anal cancers and also make sure you know your kids see that research too so they are aware of what they are in danger of getting because they haven't been vaccinated. Louis Theroux did a documentary about end of life care involving a person who was suffering from anal cancer in Los Angeles a while ago: it was absolutely awful what that poor man was going through. If I could prevent my child from suffering that fait I absolutely would in a heartbeat.

I paid £450 for my son to be vaccinated as he missed the rollout due to his age si be grateful instead of questioning government policy.

From the Greenbook. Which has several pages of references that the expert committee considered.

license
Cervarix® Gardasil® and Gardasil®9 are licensed for individuals from nine years old. Vaccination of girls and boys aged 9 to 11 years is not covered by the national HPV vaccination programme.

Schedule
Adolescents aged from 11 years and adults aged less than 25 years HPV vaccination is routinely recommended for all girls and boys from 11 years of age with vaccination offered in school year 8 in England and Wales, S1 in Scotland, and school year 9 in Northern Ireland.

No.. the age of 11 has been perceived to be before the vast majority of children would be sexually active, since that's when the vaccine needs to be administered.

If they waited until they were expected to start being sexually active, then those children at the lower end of average age of first activity would already have become active, and the vaccine might be too late for them.

I doubt your GP advocated for your child not being vaccinated so that you can benefit from others vaccinating their children. They may have mentioned it but not promoted not vaccinating.

Your attitude is selfish and uninformed.

They are both aware that they didn’t have the vaccine as it was done in school and they knew they were the only ones not having it so they are aware. They know what it’s for as well and read the info sent out. They also know it’s what their sister had done before falling ill and they know they are fully vaccinated for everything else and my ds actually said to me ‘I know for all our other vaccines you said it’s important so I trust you on this’