HPV jab

[TeenageWildlife]

My DD has been told that they are about to do these jabs at school. She is 17 so they have spread the initial target recipients. I have done some research on Gardasil and wil be encouraging her strongly NOT to have it. I am shocked by the number of deaths, the fact that it has been withdrawn in Spain, and especially this What do people think?

mrssceptic - if you look at google scholar cervarix safety trials it may reassure you and anyone else with doubts about safety.

It might. Then again it might not. The CDC report didn't.

Teenage it's not really that the initial targets have been 'spread'. The plan is still to offer the vaccine to year 8 girls - it's just that a catch-up programme is running so that all girls born after sept 1990 will have been offered the vaccine. When the catch-up is finished it will just be yr 8 who get it.
IME yes a line of teenage girls wind each other up and exacerbate nerves etc, as was the case 25 years ago in my school days!
And I can't speak for all nurses giving the vaccine, but our party line is that if a girl does not have a signed consent form (either by herself or her parent) then we do NOT pressurize them - we simply don't vaccinate. Same for a girl who does have consent but who changes her mind/ freaks out/ whatever when it gets to her turn. It's certainly not in our interests to risk our registration in doing anything that might be interpreted as forcing someone to have an intervention against their will.
We also strongly encourage the girls who are competent to sign for themselves to discuss it with their parents anyway. And on the day we encourage them to tell their parents they have had it done.
If you don't want your yr 8 child to be vaccinated, you don't sign, they don't get done. If you don't want your yr 10/11 child to be done - discuss it with them but at the end of the day if they turn up, sleeve rolled up and understanding what it's all about, we'll do it.
I'd second those saying that Youtube is probably not the place to find the most reliable and evidence-based information to base your decision on.

My daughters will be having the injection unless i see some actual evidence (not some man flashing up printouts on youtube) not to. I made sure my 16 year old sister had hers.

Can I please point out that sexual health checkups are not smears. Smears look for cancer and pre-cancerous changes ONLY and are available after the age of 25 on the NHS. Sexual health checkups use a speculum and all that, but are looking for STDs and are available to all ages (not entirely sure what the situation is about under 16s) and are what you should have before moving on to having unprotected sex with any new partner. When you go for a sexual health checkup they are very clear with you that you haven't had a smear and that they are not looking for cancer.

Leonie please be reassured that it's not possible that your daughter will just join a line of girls and end up with a vaccine because she didn't say no.

Unless she has a consent form signed with parental permission and can understand what is going on then she wouldn't get given the vaccine.

And parents are usually welcome to come along to the session if they have any concerns or questions. (they are in our schools)

You don't need to keep her off for the 3 days that they will be vaccinating in school - just tell her teacher that she isn't having it (she shouldn't be called for anyway if she didn't have a consent form) and she will remain in her lesson.

I work in a cervical screening lab & am frankly amazed that anyone who is pro-screening isn't pro-vaccination for HPV.

No - as the timescale for protection is not long term and condoms protect against much more then the vaccine.

HPV can be transmitted even if condoms are used (I think that was mentioned earlier in the thread) by skin to skin contact, so it's not an either/or situation - more HPV vaccination plus condom use to protect against other STIs

HPV can be transmitted via non-penetrative sexual activity. It is less common than by anal or vaginal sex but still possible.

Didn't know that BellaNoir.

When she's 16 she can decide herself but as the vaccine only lasts for 4-6 yrs I don't see the point of having it at age 12.

Mybox the theory I think is that most women become sexually active around the age of 16-18 and of course many start before that. Vaccinating at 12/13 onwards ensures that the majority are protected before they start having sex.

Also the data suggests that the vaccine lasts at least 4-6 years, not that it only lasts for 4-6 years.

The vaccine is known to last for at least 6 years - we just don't have the follow up data yet to determine exactly how long is does last. However the vast majority of women were still very strongly immune at 6 years, so it is likely they will continue that for quite a few more years.

The point is, that at 12, 99.9% (sorry, I don't know the exact figure on this one) of girls will not have had sexual contact. According to Brook 26% of girls have had sex by 16, and most have done so before 20.

Since most people don't carefully plan to lose their virginity, 6 months in advance, it makes a lot of sense to ensure they are covered against something that can be protected against, at a point when their chances of being exposed is minimal

Thanks for the explainations - having it done then 6 months before the age of consent would be better than not at all then. Also would have a few more years research to look at before deciding.

I hope that the safe sex message will be as widely promoted as this vaccine.

Here's a link to a recent JAMA editorial which summarises some of the risks and issues behind HPV vaccines:

jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/full/302/7/795?home

There was a similar editorial in the NEJM last year, which was highly skeptical about the benefits of HPV vaccines. The conclusion was quite clear, that there is as yet no scientific evidence that these HPV vaccines prevent cancer, and that the claims that they do are based entirely on assumptions. Meanwhile there do appear to be many girls in the US and UK who have suffered side-effects from both Gardisal and Cervarix, and some very serious.

Do some research rather than trust what the pharamceutical industry and doctors say (neither of whom offer impartial advice as they both profit financially from mass vaccination programmes). Most GPs are clueless about what goes into vaccines, how they work, and how the poor and biased the safety studies are. My view is that like just about all vaccines, there's a risk if you don't, and probably just as much a risk if you do. There are simply far too parents with stories of how their kids regressed or became seriously ill, or developed immune problems just after having a vaccine, for it to be coincidence.

(posted by meakin's DP)

The problem with offering it 6 months before the age of consent at 16 would mean a hugely complicated staggered distribution; in some areas girls are sexually active at a much earlier age and so delaying their HPV vaccine until 15.5 would be too late. Also the 3 vaccines have to be given over at least 6 months so if you started the course at 15.5 many girls may start having sex before they complete the course.

There are (certainly in my schools' area) VAST amounts of time and money being spent on sexual health education - the HPV programme certainly doesn't detract from that.

Thanks for the info.

I meant just in my family case for the 6 months before 16 - if others want their vaccines at 12+ at school then whatever other parents agree with is not my business. It's a matter for each family to consider.

Oh gotcha, thought you meant everyone.

There is evidence that women who are vaccinated have lower rates of CIN, which we can reasonably assume would progress if untreated to cancer - to allow the CIN detected by smear test to go untreated would obviously be unethical. This was published in The Lancet

Should have made it clear - but didn't think it would read as it did!! These sort of issues are really family matters.

I really don't think the vaccine will have any effect whatsoever on the age girls have sex- it isn't just HPV stopping 12 year olds suddenly starting sleeping around!

i personally see the HPV vaccine and the meningitis vaccine as two of the most amazinga advances in public healthcare IN MY LIFETIME!!!

i am only 32 but i grew up in a world where there was no vaccine for any strain of meningitis and i knew people at university who DIED from it!

i also grew up unable to protect myself from the GREATEST CAUSE OF CERVICAL CANCER (except from abstinance) and i am grateful that there is now a vaccine.

My best friend died of cervical cancer in her early 30s, there was HPV involvement but its importance / whether it was the cause was never really clear. Her particular type of cancer was rare and aggressive ('cervical' describes the location but not the cell type - there are different types of cancer cells) so despite regular smears it was not discovered in time to be completely eradicated. I understand that for most people though the chances of survival with early enough detection,are pretty good, though treatment is traumatic and really unpleasant.

Currently I'm not planning to consent to our dd being vaccinated.

I am very cynical about the marketing of this vaccine and Meakin's link makes me more so - what I've been surprised not to see anywhere is a discussion about why boys are not also being vaccinated. If the vaccine is so effective (though it only tackles 4 of the 15 dangerous strains) then why not eradicate those HPV strains altogether? There will never be 100% take up in the female population so it'll take much longer to reduce HPVs prevalance unless both men and women have the immunity required. This is where my cynicism kicks in, if its not eradicated then there'll always be a need for this programme and a market for the vaccine. But maybe i watch too much youtube!

I think it psychologically sends disturbing messages somehow too. Not very empowering for very young, mostly preadolescent, women's (I didn't start my periods til I was 16)first exposure to people in 'authority' talking to them about sex to be giving such frightening messages about it (ie we give you this injection - frightening in itself to that age group - because the alternative is much worse -you could get cancer from having sex). Girls having sex at 12 or 13 probably have bigger issues to worry about, the rest should be left alone for at least a couple of years till they have the maturity to deal with this and put it in perspective.

The other thing about it is it feels slightly misogynistic or at least protectionist to single out girls - yes they're the only ones that get cervical cancer, but they're not the only ones that get HPV. Its that old 'women are responsible for safe sex' routine. Or it might not be but it does nothing to dispel it.

Not that I'm against the promotion of safe sex, using condoms should be discussed as early as possible and should be the assumed method of protection from pregnancy and infection. The risk of HPV exposure for people using condoms must be very low? The responsibility for using condoms can and should be presented as shared by men and women as part of the whole mutual respect and healthy attitudes to sex thing. Sex education is a whole other issue but this shouldn't be separated from it.

All of these were already concerns to me before I even heard of the possibility of side effects. Hopefully more work will be done to look at these, though immune disorders are very complex and the causes seem difficult to pin down.

I am really not minimising the risks and the devastation caused by this disease. My friend left behind a husband and a young baby when she died. But I fail to see the worth of this 'half a sledgehammer' approach.

I have a few years and probably a number of heated debates before deciding on this and am really interested in hearing both sides before i make my mind up on my position on this - my partner may well have other ideas too. So am very keen to hear what people think.

Agree with Mosschops on page 1.

I have vaxed dd against everything that was available. I did look into it all briefly and decided that I'd rather believe my fantastic, qualified health professional who has been our family doctor for 25 years than a bunch or hearsay from strangers on the internet and bored mums with too much time on their hands pretending to be experts. What's new? Independent reliable eveidence on... wait for it.... YOU TUBE!

I also agree MMR is perfectly safe Mosschops.

You win the gold star for most sensible post so far.