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 I am shocked by the number of deaths, the fact that it has been withdrawn in Spain, and especially this What do people think?

Next week is when they start the vaccination programme in school. Would prefer more time to think and consider but assumed this was my "free"go- hadn't thouht that I could take her tothe GPs later on. Need to check really but do feel under pressure about this.

Thanks. Looks like the abnormalities related to certain types of HPV progress faster than others, when they do progress.

I'll look at the links in a minute but can anyone help with

web links to the Future 1 and Future 2 studies so I can check comments on the web that overall cancer rates were only about 20% higher in the unvaccinated group?

information on the "novel" adjuvant used in Cervarix. Am I right in thinking Cervarix has twice the aluminium level of Gardasil? What would my chance of getting Gardasil from my gp (without payment) be?

said - if you decide to go for it send them in with some paracetamol for the sore arm and tell them to make sure they are sitting down when vaccinated.

Hi,

My daughter is only 7 but I have known since she was very yong that when the time comes I would encourage her to have the vaccine. We have no cancer at all in my family, may seem unbelievable but no member of my family, with the exception of one aunt (by marriage) has ever had cancer. But my daughters grandmother (dads side) died of cervical cancer 4 years ago. If I can do anything at all to limit the chances of my daughter having the same fate, I will do it. The chances of reaction, like with most vaccines, is incredibly rare (and I am saying that as a mother of a vaccine damaged son!) and overall, having seen first hand what this cancer can do, I would opt for the vaccine any day. Of course I would encourage no unprotected sex, no smoking etc, but every little helps as far as I am concerned!

said: they would have to do it I'm sure at the GP -- after all your child could be genuinely ill and off school on the day.

I had the Rubella jab at 12. This did not make me think "oh, let's go and get laid." If anything, it emphasised the fact that sex can have consequences. And if I had waited to have the jab until such time as I was trying to conceive it would have been too late, given that pregnancy no.1 was accidental. I will definitely give consent to my daughter having the HPV jab at 12 - although I suspect that if a 12 year old was insistent that they wanted/didn't want the jab, that their views would hold sway (can't remember the court case on contraception for under 16s, but I'm sure it would be relevant here).

Some of the responses on here amaze me. I have two boys so while it doesn't affect me directly (yet?) if I had girls I would have them in that queue as fast as possible.

Cancer is an evil disease in any form and I have seen it several times first hand. I have also had scares and had a couple of friends who have had to have some nasty treatments for cell changes, if I could prevent my child from the possibility of having to go through this I wouldn't hesitate for a second.

For those posters who some how think having this jab will make your child suddenly promiscuous - are you on another planet? Do you seriously think the reason your DD hasn't had sex was becasue of the fear of cancer?

And for those other posters with the perfect sensible children who will not have sex until older than 16, you need to get a grip on reality. You will probably never know when your child has sex (and as said previously they don't actually have to have intercourse to catch HPV) I had sex before I was 16, I came from a religious family with strong moral codes but a teenagers hormones are something else, I can guarentee that my parents didn't have a clue.

I think since the MMR nonsense everyone suddenly thinks that vacines are the devil's work. Protection from disease is a good thing and it's the reason our children live such long lives. Herd immunity is also vital in making sure we're protected so all of you who say 'my child isn't having it' also put others at risk.

End of rant, as you were.

Condoms are very useful in protecting against HPV transmission actually

And 'coming from a very religious background' of course doesn't prevent you having sex. What prevents one from having sex early or promiscuously is information and the ability to have frank and free discussions with your parents. It is not a fail safe device, but definitely helps.

MoontheLoon You said "I can guarentee that my parents didn't have a clue" well some of us keep a closer eye on our children. I don't expect my child will tell me but I do believe I will find out, provided they are living at home at the time.

However while a child has sex before 16 or after it isn't the issue at the moment. What is important is whether they have the vaccine before they have acquired HPV or not. 10% acquire at least one strain of HPV by 14 in some studies, the majority acquire it by 24. However most will also clear it out from their body - 70% within a year and 90% within 2 years. The people at greatest risk of cancer are those who have repeated infections. If you sleep around you can easily pick up a different strain before you've cleared the first.

The decision for my child isn't going to be based on averages. They are old enough to decide themself. Schools tell them their rights, they can not then complain if they refuse. For most young women the risk of a serious reaction is small. Minor reactions seem to be greatly under-reported judging by the frequency at my child's school. My extended family happens to have had vaccine problems. So far none of them have been long-lasting but some children were advised not to complete their vaccinations. If my child is persuaded to have one injection they probably have a higher than average risk of reaction / not completing the course.

When my child picks up HPV they are likely to clear it quickly as their immune system works almost too well. They are part of the catch up programme - but haven't started having boyfriends yet. They don't smoke. So they are higher than average reaction risk and lower than average infection risk.

I don't know how a gp will react if someone was at school for the vaccine, refused but then wishes to have it later. If I can persuade my child to have the vaccine I may find out.

Forgot to say - boys with HPV infection are more likely to get various cancers, including penile cancers, oral cancers and anal cancers (presumably if homosexual for the latter). However they are still looking at risks/ benefits for vaccinating boys.

sorry haven't read the last few posts - hope I'm not repeating anything Re boys getting the vaccine - its very unlikely that boys are going to want to get a vaccine for HPV - as it doesn't (as far as I know) do them any direct harm. If boys were being targetted how would a girl know whether or not they'd had the vaccine and be able to make a decision re sex with them?

I've been involved in providing "out of school" HPV - to girls aged about 18. To me this is completely the wrong target group - it seemed completely illogical to be giving a vaccination to young women who wre obviously already sexually active (coming along to get the vac with 3 kids..). Cathching girls before they are sexually active definitely makes more sense.

My other concern is that girls think that this will protect them against all cervical cancer, leading to a decrease in the uptake of smears - so potentially a rise in cancers not caught early.

yes that is my concern too lal, - that it will provide a false security and condom use will fall even more, as well as the smear rate falling.

it seems that HPV infection can do boys harm (see posts above). Whether it does enough harm to justify vaccination is still being considered.

If anone wants to read the Future 2 study (a study that was provided to support the vaccination programme ) it is here content.nejm.org/cgi/content/full/356/19/1915#F1

That study does suggest that a decline in cancers caused by the strains vaccinated against is partly offset by a rise in cancers caused by other strains of HPV - so that the overal reduction in cervical cancer is only 17%. So the vaccine is certainly not the answer to a non-maiden's prayer. However cancers caused by the strains vaccinated against may progress more rapidly. If that is so then the reduction in deaths may be nearer to the reduction in cancers caused by the vaccine strains. It is also possible that the results will be different in young girls since the only studies so far have been in those 15 and over.

Many thanks for this link jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/full/302/7/795?home
I am very glad that my PFB has decided against this jab.

Thank TeenageWildlife I'd missed that one and it is helpful.

I start from the assumption that vaccination is generally desirable. However it does no-one any benefit to overstate the advantages and understate the disadvantages. That simply leads to scepticism about medical advice generally.

The way it looks to me - 17% fewer cases of cancer in the vaccination group after a relatively short time period. Doesn't seem to be a decreasing gap with time so the benefit will probably still be there in longer term studies. Probably greater impact on deaths because it looks like the cancers caused by the strains of HPV that are in the vaccine progress more rapidly. However if that is the case it won't show up for several years and by then it will be too late for my child to be vaccinated. Possible reduction in unnecssary procedures for those who have abnormal cells that would never develop to cancer - doctors will probably be more likely to watch and wait to see if the problem clears in vaccinated women.

Vaccination only shown to be beneficial for 6 year so far but every reason to believe that in longer term stuides it will show longer term benefit.

Minor reactions are being understated but many reports of more serious reactions will be coincidence. Serious side-effects are rare.

That's enough of a benefit for me to encourage my child to be vaccinated but not enough for me to try and force the issue.

My 15 year old daughter will be having her HPV jabs at school this month. She was also called by GP for teenage MMR/tetanus booster this week. I called GP to check whether it was OK to have two vaccinations at the same time and was told to schedule MMR until after 2nd HPV. No-one else seems to have queried this amongst her friends. Was I worrying unnecessarily?

Dd1 (17) came home with the forms last week. We have done so much reading about it I think my head is going to burst. We have decided against it, dd1's proviso was as long as she could have it done at a later date if she changed her mind. Hopefully that's true. We were asked to give a reason on the form.

It's not so much the side-effects it's the long term effects that bother me. As has been mentioned - fertility etc. Obviously we are not in a position to know because it is so new.

In RL, mums are saying they have read up on it and are quite happy. But these are only the leaflets issued by the NHS! Also I get the impression the makers of Cervarix are competing with the makers of Gardasil for world domination! Cervarix is cheaper apparently - I just hope they haven't rushed through the testing/ignored results for purely commercial reasons.

Feel free to rubbish my concerns - I have no scientific knowledge, just gut feelings!

I visited the doctor last week and while I was there I asked about the HPV virus for my daughter ahe is 18 and we have had an offer through for her to get the vaccine. The doctor said that up until her 19 birthday the jab is free. If she wanted the jab after her 19 birthday she said the surgery would charge £450.00 Anybody else been quoted this amount? Is it a ploy to encourage vaccination

Phoenix 09

phoenix - the catch programme covers those upto the age of 18 yo; and that is what is funded. If you request something that is outside of the NHS funding, there will be a charge. If your DD missed vaccination by accident/illness etc rather than by choice then I would assume there would be no charge.

yes it is phoenix

Please, everyone, check out the web sites under HPV Jab and then check out www.naturalnews.com and any others that talk about side effects, problems, especially american sites as there is more information coming from america about paralysis, death, etc. I wouldn't have my girls injected with this vaccine no matter what. PROTECT YOUR GIRLS FROM THE PHARMACEUTICAL'S GREED FOR MONEY they don't care what happens to the children as long as everyone pays for a jab.

I agree it is good to read up on a subject and I started reading about the HPV jab on naturalnews, as Sheen11223344 suggested, but was somewhat put off by a link on the same page to an article entitled "Beat diabetes in 25 days", which included the sentence
"Yet you'll never hear the truth from doctors, drug companies or even diabetes organizations."

Sorry, but I distrust any website that promotes conspiracy theories.

news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8279656.stm

That girl is dead. If she had not had the jab she would be alive. I am very glad my daughter is not having this.

This is obviously a tragic case, but no-one knows yet if the girl died as a result of the vaccine or if it was co-oincidence, as the Gt Ormond St. teenage paediatrician talking on the radio 4 Today programme this morning pointed out. A post mortem should show if she died as a result of, for example,a severe allergic reaction to the jab, or had some previously unknown condition e.g. cardiac.
I do think the fact that 1.4m vaccines have been given in the UK and this is the first reported case of a death in any way connected shows that the HPV jab is not cutting a swathe through our teenagers. According to Office of National Statistics, in 2008 death rates for girls age 10-14 from all causes are 100 per million, for 15-19 it is 200 per million. Somebody, somewhere will be looking at and comparing death rates between vaccinated and non-vaccinated groups and then conclusions can be drawn. Until then, I prefer to wait for some facts, rather than jumping to obvious conclusions.