Page 18 | Smear test - is it normal to find leaves and twigs?

User748937744 · 2025-10-01T17:18:02+00:00

Ok, clickbait title - for a reason! I am in my 40s and had my first smear test today. It was so fine and so quick and so painless and so straightforward and I wish I’d been brave enough to go for all the many years I’ve ignored the invitations! Aibu to tell as many people as I can who might also never have gone to just do it? I’ll happily go back next time I’m called. I only went today because I’ve had some symptoms that were concerning. It was so built up as something embarrassing and possibly painful in my head and it just wasn’t either. Please, please go. You can always say you’re nervous and would like to be seen by someone really understanding.

Original poster

User748937744 · 03/10/2025 16:17

Zillahhh · 03/10/2025 15:12

So lame that people are replying negatively. Well done OP - I’m 43 and I’m shy/lazy/have moved home. Buts no excuse, and I’ve been a heavy smoker all my life. I will book mine off the back of your thread - THANK YOU!!

Ah, thanks and I hope it all goes well for you

OP posts:

Hollerationinthedancerieeee · 03/10/2025 16:25

saffy2 · 03/10/2025 06:59

It can save lives. I understand trauma,
wholeheartedly. But this can save your life. I am shocked that woman avoid this. And op did not avoid it due to trauma.

Show quote history

She didn’t but you said you were shocked that “people” avoid it. I just pointed out that pain and trauma are two reasons why some people avoid it.

user1493379562 · 03/10/2025 16:27

Idontpostmuch · 03/10/2025 14:55

Re nuns, the study in Ghana tested 105 nuns and 25 of them were HPV pos. Don't know how many were high risk. Of these, 4 had abnormal cells, 2 of whom had further investigation. Both were OK. These results were much the same as in the general population. You might get a scattering of nuns having had sex, but you wouldn't expect as much infection as with other women. It strongly suggests there are other methods of transmission.

Show quote history

Perhaps sex toys? Also we had a high incidence of women with HIV who presented with pre cancerous cells. The consultant I worked with used to get a bit peeved as he knew that as soon as these women started their retro virals the abnormal cells would nearly always clear up. Like I said with some women acquire HPV but their own immune system can fight them off. Sadly there is no way of telling unless the woman has a smear. My own sister had to have a hysterectomy when they found she had cervical cancer but it saved her life! She was very young too in her early 20's. Our poor mother however was very prudish when it came to discussing anything to with sex or medical issues in that department presented with bleeding after the menopause. I remember seeing some blood in the bottom of the toilet. When I asked her about it she blamed it on piles. She had been to her GP who had said, 'Oh it's nothing it's your age' she took his word as gospel. Our mother gave up smoking and put on quite a bit of weight having previously been tall and slim.We put her weight gain down to giving up smoking and eating more. She didn't go back to see her GP until she experienced pain. The hospital found she had a uterine cancer the size of a 26 week fetus! I was 36 when our mother died. She died of ignorance. I just wish I had known then what I know now. So all of you who have made your mind up not to have a smear for whatever reason, please, please find other ways you can have smear. I would hate for your children to lose their mother!

Askingforafriendtoday · 03/10/2025 17:37

BurntBroccoli · 03/10/2025 13:59

Is that deaths?

Show quote history

No, incidence

Askingforafriendtoday · 03/10/2025 17:39

Askingforafriendtoday · 03/10/2025 17:37

No, incidence

Show quote history

Bu more people die of brain tumour globally than cervical cancer actually but ct scans and MRI scans carry their own risks

Idontpostmuch · 03/10/2025 19:01

MyrtleLion · 01/10/2025 23:04

I find it really painful, and was advised to ask for a small speculum and to take it slowly. I am furious that they insist on my gay DSD having one when she has never had penetrative sex with a penis.

You don't need to have hetero sex. Lesbian sex also a risk.

Idontpostmuch · 03/10/2025 19:03

user1493379562 · 03/10/2025 16:27

Perhaps sex toys? Also we had a high incidence of women with HIV who presented with pre cancerous cells. The consultant I worked with used to get a bit peeved as he knew that as soon as these women started their retro virals the abnormal cells would nearly always clear up. Like I said with some women acquire HPV but their own immune system can fight them off. Sadly there is no way of telling unless the woman has a smear. My own sister had to have a hysterectomy when they found she had cervical cancer but it saved her life! She was very young too in her early 20's. Our poor mother however was very prudish when it came to discussing anything to with sex or medical issues in that department presented with bleeding after the menopause. I remember seeing some blood in the bottom of the toilet. When I asked her about it she blamed it on piles. She had been to her GP who had said, 'Oh it's nothing it's your age' she took his word as gospel. Our mother gave up smoking and put on quite a bit of weight having previously been tall and slim.We put her weight gain down to giving up smoking and eating more. She didn't go back to see her GP until she experienced pain. The hospital found she had a uterine cancer the size of a 26 week fetus! I was 36 when our mother died. She died of ignorance. I just wish I had known then what I know now. So all of you who have made your mind up not to have a smear for whatever reason, please, please find other ways you can have smear. I would hate for your children to lose their mother!

Show quote history

Well, only if they were sharing sex toys. That seems unlikely.

user1493379562 · 03/10/2025 22:40

Vivianebrooksmatsumoto · 02/10/2025 18:58

I've read the work of Dr Margaret Mccartney and the results of the Raffle study and I won't have one done ever again as I was very low risk and was never told that. That situation has never changed so I've made an informed choice that I don't have them done.

She is a GP, a general practitioner not a Gynecologist! Yes it is possible if a woman has to have extensive treatments for pre cancerous cells it can weaken the cervix. If a woman goes for regular smear test these pre cancerous cells will be detected earlier and therefore less extensive treatments. If a woman becomes pregnant it is possible to have a simple stitch in the cervix to strengthen it and it is simply removed at the time of birth. Surely women would prefer this than risk these pre cancerous cells developing into actual cancer? Obviously not every woman will have abnormal cells but judging by the stream of women who came to the Colposcopy clinic where I worked an awful lot do! We had full clinics.

user1493379562 · 03/10/2025 22:46

Idontpostmuch · 03/10/2025 19:03

Well, only if they were sharing sex toys. That seems unlikely.

Show quote history

I was trying to be polite. Think of other things that could be used as sex toys. Did you know that you can also get throat cancer with HPV?

user1493379562 · 03/10/2025 22:47

Idontpostmuch · 03/10/2025 19:03

Well, only if they were sharing sex toys. That seems unlikely.

Show quote history

I was trying to be polite. Think of other things that could be used as sex toys. Did you know that you can also get throat cancer with HPV?

JenXWarrior · 04/10/2025 08:07

user1493379562

Surely women would prefer this than risk these pre cancerous cells developing into actual cancer?

I know it's hard to accept but not everyone views this the same. For some, the risk isn't significant enough to push them to have smears. If it was, there'd be 100% attendance.

It simply isn't the case that the fear of the outcome is a driver for behaviour. If it was then no one would smoke, take drugs, drink alcohol, have unprotected sex, take part in extreme sports etc. but we do.

Any procedure, even screenings, carry risks. They may be physical or psychological and the individual is entitled to make that calculation for themselves.

I respect others' decision to get screened, while they seem unable to extend that courtesy to those who don't.

ChristmasFluff · 04/10/2025 09:00

Something else to consider, which Medlife Crisis on YouTube (below) covers comprehensively, is that there is little data kept on whether screening (of any type) increases lifespan or increases treatment time.

If you detect early, then the 5 year survival rate can look much improved, even if you end up dying at exactly the same time you would have if you hadn't had any screening or treatment. So screening can look like a great choice.

But if places that have cervical screening have the same death rates of cervical cancer as those that don't (I used Japan as the reference, as this is also a developed country), then it indicates that all you are doing is extending treatment time.

Here's the video that explains it:

BurntBroccoli · 04/10/2025 09:08

ChristmasFluff · 04/10/2025 09:00

Something else to consider, which Medlife Crisis on YouTube (below) covers comprehensively, is that there is little data kept on whether screening (of any type) increases lifespan or increases treatment time.

If you detect early, then the 5 year survival rate can look much improved, even if you end up dying at exactly the same time you would have if you hadn't had any screening or treatment. So screening can look like a great choice.

But if places that have cervical screening have the same death rates of cervical cancer as those that don't (I used Japan as the reference, as this is also a developed country), then it indicates that all you are doing is extending treatment time.

Here's the video that explains it:

I’ve just tried to find actual cervical cancer deaths from 1950 - present and nothing comes up. Loads on incidences which is not the same thing.
I might have to do an FOI.

ChristmasFluff · 04/10/2025 09:16

@BurntBroccoli the video also covers how misleading incidence can be when you screen, and how it can even artificially lower death rates.

As he says at the end, no-one is saying 'don't go for screening' - but for people to make an informed choice, they need to be aware of the full picture. As @JenXWarrior says, those of us who make a fully-informed choice to not have a smear are the ones who are treated as though we are ignorant, when we have made the most effort to be informed.

The smear test has been criticised at medical conferences since the 1980s - this was where I first came across the arguments for and against. The general public are largely unaware of this controversy, and that isn't fair. Let's have a smear test leaflet that fully and honestly lays out the pros and cons.

Theresabatinmykitchen · 04/10/2025 10:50

those of us who make a fully-informed choice to not have a smear are the ones who are treated as though we are ignorant, when we have made the most effort to be informed.

Absolutely, it’s the same with breast cancer screening, I’ve made an informed choice through extensive research and decide against it, however I don’t tell anyone as I would be treated like the village idiot and be driven out with torches and pitchforks.

Havetogooutagain · 04/10/2025 11:23

It really is a problem when the risks as well the benefits of screening aren’t made absolutely clear to those being screened.
It brings ‘informed consent’ into question for a start.
I do think there is more of an effort made to explain things now, but I don’t think the downsides to screening are made clear enough still.

JenXWarrior · 04/10/2025 11:30

ChristmasFluff · 04/10/2025 09:16

@BurntBroccoli the video also covers how misleading incidence can be when you screen, and how it can even artificially lower death rates.

As he says at the end, no-one is saying 'don't go for screening' - but for people to make an informed choice, they need to be aware of the full picture. As @JenXWarrior says, those of us who make a fully-informed choice to not have a smear are the ones who are treated as though we are ignorant, when we have made the most effort to be informed.

The smear test has been criticised at medical conferences since the 1980s - this was where I first came across the arguments for and against. The general public are largely unaware of this controversy, and that isn't fair. Let's have a smear test leaflet that fully and honestly lays out the pros and cons.

Just to clarify.

I'm not saying that all women who refuse are the most informed or that those who do have screenings are uninformed. It's personal choice, however that decision is reached.

We all know about smears and the arguments for them. Not everyone refusing does so for the same reasons. It could be that the risk doesn't bother them enough, they are embarrassed or had a bad experience. They may not think they are high risk due to sexual history or a negative HPV result on a self test.

JonnieSeagull · 04/10/2025 11:47

ChristmasFluff · 04/10/2025 09:00

Something else to consider, which Medlife Crisis on YouTube (below) covers comprehensively, is that there is little data kept on whether screening (of any type) increases lifespan or increases treatment time.

If you detect early, then the 5 year survival rate can look much improved, even if you end up dying at exactly the same time you would have if you hadn't had any screening or treatment. So screening can look like a great choice.

But if places that have cervical screening have the same death rates of cervical cancer as those that don't (I used Japan as the reference, as this is also a developed country), then it indicates that all you are doing is extending treatment time.

Here's the video that explains it:

Great share.

Sadworld23 · 04/10/2025 12:11

hollylou · 01/10/2025 19:13

Please don't assume you will remain HPV negative even if in a monogamous relationship. HPV can lie dormant for many many years before it can flare and cause issues. I've recently had to have surgey for vulva skin changes caused by a strain on HPV and I've been with mu husband 15 years. That's why it's so important to attend for regular screening.

Show quote history

Yes i just tested positive for hpv, have monogamous sex for last 7 years, previously 15years celibate o

Zippidydoodah · 04/10/2025 13:22

I tested positive after 18 years of the same partner. Thankfully, the following year I was all clear.

i think it’s fair to acknowledge that it’s horrible for some people, but that you should give it your best go and not ignore it, for the fact that it could save your life.

my first one after having one of my children was absolutely excruciating, jumping up and hitting the ceiling painful, but all the others I’ve had have been fine. Not pleasant, but ok.

katepilar · 04/10/2025 13:22

user1493379562 · 03/10/2025 22:40

She is a GP, a general practitioner not a Gynecologist! Yes it is possible if a woman has to have extensive treatments for pre cancerous cells it can weaken the cervix. If a woman goes for regular smear test these pre cancerous cells will be detected earlier and therefore less extensive treatments. If a woman becomes pregnant it is possible to have a simple stitch in the cervix to strengthen it and it is simply removed at the time of birth. Surely women would prefer this than risk these pre cancerous cells developing into actual cancer? Obviously not every woman will have abnormal cells but judging by the stream of women who came to the Colposcopy clinic where I worked an awful lot do! We had full clinics.

Show quote history

Surely women would prefer this than risk these pre cancerous cells developing into actual cancer?

Errrm, surely not? Its fine if you prefer the options you described but why do you think everyone would? Why would you get precedures that are not necessary?

I looked into how likely are the precancerous cells likely to change into cancer. From what I am reading right now its 2% for CIN I and 20% for CIN III. Thats seems actually quite low to me.

ChristmasFluff · 04/10/2025 15:27

JenXWarrior · 04/10/2025 11:30

Just to clarify.

I'm not saying that all women who refuse are the most informed or that those who do have screenings are uninformed. It's personal choice, however that decision is reached.

We all know about smears and the arguments for them. Not everyone refusing does so for the same reasons. It could be that the risk doesn't bother them enough, they are embarrassed or had a bad experience. They may not think they are high risk due to sexual history or a negative HPV result on a self test.

Show quote history

Sorry, @JenXWarrior - I didn't mean to misrepresent what you said.

Mummyof32023 · 04/10/2025 17:59

After 3 children a smear test is nothing but it could save my life. My children need me so I'll do the test

RachelBerry03 · 04/10/2025 18:16

Seriously OP, we are grown ups. We don’t need silly titles to get our attention…or to convince us to have a test which could save our lives.

Lillybuff · 04/10/2025 18:25

Actually your clickbait title has done the opposite for me, I’m not reading it and I just wish people were upfront with there intentions in the first place!! There really is no need to lie