To not let dd have the HVP vaccination?

[DogGoneMad]

Dh and I really disagree on this.

Juule - the tissue samples (taken for investigation/treatment) arent routinely tested for HPV type as its not been needed.

The Bosch review (2002 in J Cancer I think, I'm not at my computer) has loads of info about HPV types (of which there are many) and the research in establishing the link between HPV and cervical cancer. That should have some detail about which types tend to be persistent and integrate into the host DNA. Which ones are the prevalent high risk types vary geographically as well.

Thank you Olay and Bela.

Does that mean, Bela, that HPV incidence is unlikely to be reduced or eradicated?

i think yr right im not allowing my daughter to have it until shes 16 as shes told me many friends think its a free pass to underage sex. and shes told me she'd never have underage sex so agrees with mr to wait till16

i think yr right im not allowing my daughter to have it until shes 16 as shes told me many friends think its a free pass to underage sex. and shes told me she'd never have underage sex so agrees with mr to wait till16.

I hope am sure she is one of those teenages who tell their parents the truth rather than what she thinks they want to hear.

Ok, I've just seen the following on another HPV thread, which answers my question about how many strains of HPV there are - although still not the question about whether the strains mutate like flu strains, so I would still like any links about that, if possible?

There are over 100 types of hpv, 15 of them may cause CC if they cause cell changes that aren't treated.

It usually takes 20 years for CC to develop from HPV but we know it can develop faster (I'm surprised you were happy to quote that tbh PIMS) so smear tests are important to detect the pre-cancerous cells and prevent them from developing into cancer.

The cevarix vaccine offers protection (although it is not 100% guaranteed) against 2 of the strains of hpv that can cause about 70% of CC, as long as you haven't been sexually active before you have the vaccine. 30% of CC cases are caused by another 13 strains.

90% of hpv cases won't cause any problems and will resolve themselves without requiring treatment so just because you have hpv (which 80% of people will do at some time in their life) does not necessarily mean that you will have cell changes or that those cell changes will develop into cancer.

They aren't sure how long the vaccine will protect against the 2 strains for, at the moment they reckon 5 years.

We don't know what the longterm risks of the vaccine are yet but they don't think there will be any.

So it all really boils down to - If you want to get vaccinated and are happy to accept that there are risks (as with any vaccine, this one is no exception) and that there may be some that we don't know about yet then have it, if you aren't, then don't.

Whatever you decide to do make sure you get regular smear tests - they are the best way of preventing cervical cancer according to Cancer Research UK.

Also worth bearing in mind that there is no need to be rude, critical or judgemental because someone has looked at the information and has come to a different conclusion than you did.

Juule, interesting posts about gardasil/cevarix on their own actually leading to an increased incidence of CC. I can understand why if it means that false reassurance from the vaccine results in people not having regular screening. The trials that have been done to test effectiveness of the vaccine have meant that women have to have regular smears. In the general population people are probably more complacent so it will be interesting to see if the vaccine does actually have the expected impact or if the 'vaccine prevented cases' will be replaced by cases caused by the other strains due to people missing their smear tests because they (incorrectly) think they are completely protected against CC .

Sorry, should have edited out references to other posts on the other thread, IYSWIM.

bravamama if your DD's friends see it a s afree pass to underage sex i would be concerned at their parents'/school's ineffective sex education. Don't they know about other sexually transmitted diseases, including HIV? The risk of pregnancy? What an odd position to hold.

Persistent HPV infections are now recognized as the cause of essentially all cervical cancers, as well as most cases of anal cancer. In 2011, more than 12,000 women in the United States are expected to be diagnosed with cervical cancer and more than 4,000 are expected to die from it. Cervical cancer is diagnosed in nearly half a million women each year worldwide, claiming a quarter of a million lives annually.

Globally, HPV is the most common sexually transmitted infection. Like all sexually transmitted infections, peak prevalence of HPV infection occurs within the first decade after sexual debut, typically between the ages of 15 to 25 years in most western countries.

Persistent viral infection with carcinogenic HPV genotypes causes virtually all cancer of the cervix. Carcinogenic HPV infections also cause most cancers of the anus, vagina, vulva, penis, and about a third to a half of the cancers the oropharynx.

In 10 to 20 percent of people, however, the infection persists (this does not mean mutation). In this situation, there is a greater chance of developing cervical pre-cancer and then cancer. However, it usually takes at least 20 years for HPV infection to cause cervical cancer. Thus, regular testing is important in detecting cervical abnormalities early, before cancer develops.

Over 100 different types of HPV have been identified; 40 of these are known to infect the cervix and 15 are known to cause cervical cancer. Researchers have labeled the HPV types as being high or low risk for causing cervical cancer.

HPV types 6 and 11 can cause about 90 percent of genital warts. These types are low-risk because they do not cause cervical cancer.

Types 16 and 18 are the high-risk types that cause most (about 70 percent) cases of cervical cancer. HPV types 45 and 31 are also high-risk types, causing about 5 to 10 percent of cervical cancers.

There is no curative treatment for HPV, if the body is unable to fight is off (as with 10-20% of cases) the treatment is based on control of mutated cells through laser therapy surgical removal and if needed other cancer therapies

(Gardasil®) helps to prevent infection with four HPV types (6, 11, 16, and 18) (efficacy 95-100%)

The other vaccine (Cervarix®) prevents infection with HPV types 16 and 18, (efficacy 95-100) and it may offer some protection against HPV types 45 and 31. (60-75%)

I see you are new to mn lemonbalm, welcome :)

The incidence of the types of HPV in whichever vaccine are likely to fall. To talk about eradication is a bit strong really - I think it's only smallpox that's been achieved for isn't it?

this is the link to the ARTISTIC full report.

Vaccination as with screening is about choices and part of the decision making process should be based on reading the info out there. Finding the info and understanding it's validity is obviously not so easy.
It's important also to understand what screening is and its limitations. We've been having a discussion about this on weevil's thread in general health.

As far as (cervical) screening goes, I think its important to understand that it's not a perfect test. It is possible (as people have mentioned anecdotally on this thread) to go for screening regularly as still develop pre-cancerous and cancerous changes. There are several reasons:

1. different types of cancer - some develop more quickly. These are unlikely to be picked up with screening.
2. sampling - sometimes the abnormality is out of reach of the sampling device or is a small area
3. false negatives - reading a cervical screening test is done by people not machines. Screening staff go through rigorous and lengthy training and are constantly monitored and regularly tested. We can still make mistakes. Reading a sample is probably closer to a cross between doing a wordsearch and modern art. Its quite subjective rather than being like, say haematology where there are more clearly defined numerical parameters for test results.

There's a good online atlas here, note that most of the magnifications are shown at x40 or x60 and the sample is usually screened at x10 so the cells are much smaller.

Having said that, the cervical screening programme in the UK does work really well, because of quality and training, and also because there's a centralised system for calling women for tests and recording them. The cancer incidence has dropped significantly.
So I would always encourage someone to go for screening.

was that welcome for me? if it was thankyou. still getting the hang of it and if i could i'd give a smiley face.

And here's the Bosch paper, from J Clin Path

hi guys i havnt read the entire thread as i jst came and its progressed alot so i dnt knw if someone has answered this or not

why is the vaccine given only in teenage? can older people recieve it too ?

vanfurgston that's a whole other thread by itself. Essentially the aim is to vaccine before someone's had an HPV infection. It's easy to catch so older people are more likely to have been exposed to it. You could chose to have an HPV test and then be vaccination but you would need to do that privately.

Sorry if this should be obvious, but what is meant by "persistent" HPV infections? Is that where you get the virus, and it doesn't clear up, ie you don't recover from it? Or is it where you keep getting reinfected, for example by changing sexual partners, or your partner doing so?

Link below:
WARNING there are some images of cancers in the first couple of slides so please please do not look at it if squeamish!
Presentation by Margaret Stanley about HPV types, prevalence and cancer.

cardibach, i had the same concerns, and wrote to school to say the same about what my daughters friends think in regard to vaccination and was told they are given the full facts! my DD knows everything about it and STD's, i only wish her friends parents would do the same until then my DD passes on her informed info.

Persistent is generally defined as getting HPV and not clearing it.
To develop cancer HPV needs to be persistent and then intergrate.
So some people get HPV and clear (variable amount of time)
Some people have persistent HPV but it doesn't integrate
Some people have persistent HPV and it does integrate

There's lots of research developing markers that could identify HPV integration but they are only just at the point now where they could be used for testing.
Cytology (the pap test) is useful as you can see that a cell has changed because it looks different (see the atlas link)

That is so useful, Bela, I can't tell you how grateful I am. It is just so difficult to confront and research cancer - I am avoiding that Stanley presentation for now.

I wonder why promiscuity increases the risk of integration. You would think monogamists would be at the same risk? (Or at least at the same risk once they had acquired the HPV infection.)

Lemonbalm: "I wonder why promiscuity increases the risk of integration. You would think monogamists would be at the same risk? (Or at least at the same risk once they had acquired the HPV infection.)"

Where did that info come from?
I've mostly understood that the risks from multiple partners where more to do with increasing the chance of getting infected rather than influencing integration (bear in mind some of the links I haven't read for awhile and there may be more upto date stuff about)

Potentially person A could get infected with HPV after one encounter with. Another co-factor is smoking.
Personally I don't think its helpful to talk about the number of partners rather than being safe and trying to reduce your risk.
Not smoking or stopping smoking, attending for screening when appropriate, potentially being vaccinated and also importantly acting on symptoms if you have them.

Ok I have RL stuff to do, hope the info has been useful whatever your take on the vaccination is. Will check back in later.

Leonie, 16+18 are responsible for 70% of all cervical cancers. I believe the breakdown is 50/20%
both vaccines protect against these strains about (95-100%)

Strains 45+32 cause a further 5-10. Ceravix gives some protection against these, but it's protection is not as high as for the other two strains