|
|
|
|
HPV Vaccination For Boys Is A Tough Sell
By Brody Levesque | ATLANTA, GEORGIA -- The Center's for Disease Control Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices has issued a finding this week that young boys as well as girls should be given the controversial HPV vaccination against human papillomavirus, or HPV. The panel's recommendation is designed to to protect young people from HPV infection before they become sexually active. Federal health officials usually adopt what the panel says and asks doctors and patients to follow the recommendations.
Dr. Anne Schuchat, a U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention administrator who oversees the agency's immunization programs notes:
"HPV infection is the most common sexually transmitted disease — between 75 percent and 80 percent of females and males in the United States will be infected at some point in their lives. Most will overcome the infection with no ill effects. But in some people, infections lead to cellular changes that cause warts or cancer, including cervical, vaginal and vulvar cancers in women and anal cancers in men and women. A growing body of evidence suggests that HPV also causes throat cancers in men and women as a result of oral sex. HPV infections cause about 15,000 cancers in women and 7,000 cancers in men each year."
The vaccination program is controversial as evidenced by disagreement between GOP candidates for president, Texas Governor Rick Perry-who issued an executive order in 2007 mandating girls get the HPV vaccine as part of a school immunization program which was later overturned by a court- was disparaged for his advocacy for HPV vaccinations for girls by rival candidate, Congresswoman Michelle Bachmann,(R-MN), who during a recent GOP debate, had accused Perry of putting kids at risk for complications like mental retardation. (CDC experts had advised the panel there is no evidence the HPV vaccine can cause mental retardation.)
Dr. Schuchat acknowledged that due to misinformation, the campaign for routine vaccination is a tough sell. According to the CDC's own findings,49 percent of adolescent girls had gotten at least the first of the recommended three HPV shots, however, only one third had received the required three doses. Schuchat said that the statistics were "pretty terrible," attributing the low percentage for girls to confusion or misunderstanding by parents that they can wait until their daughters became sexually active. Dr. Schuchat cautions that the HPV vaccine will only work if the shots are given prior to a girl being exposed to the virus, which occurs during sexual activity.
The committee also recommended the vaccination for males 13 through 21 years who have not been vaccinated previously or who have not completed the three-dose series. But that could be a challenge, stigmatism may stop boys from receiving the HPV vaccine.
Recent studies have indicated that the vaccine prevents anal cancer in males with one study that focused on gay males finding it to be 75 percent effective. But while anal cancer has been increasing, it's still a fairly rare cancer in males, with only about 7,000 cases in the U.S. each year that are tied to the strains of viruses targeted in the HPV vaccine. In contrast, about vaccine-preventable 15,000 cervical cancers occur annually.
Dr. Ranit Mishori, a family practice doctor in Washington, D.C., and an assistant professor at the Georgetown University School of Medicine notes that the vaccination's use against anal cancer may not be much of a selling point, there will be parents who may say; "'Why are you vaccinating my son against anal cancer? He's not gay! He's not ever going to be gay!' I can see that will come up," said Mishori, who supports the committee's recommendation.
“It’s a conundrum,” said Dr. James Turner, immediate past president of the American College Health Association and a liaison to the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP). “The conundrum is many times boys or teenagers don’t really fully understand or clarify their sexual orientation for years.” In addition, there’s the danger that the stigma of a vaccine aimed only at young gay and bisexual boys and men would hinder use. “I’m advocating it for all boys,” Dr. Turner said.
That means a vaccine targeted to young men who know they’re gay or bisexual likely wouldn’t reach many of the males who may need it, or reach them early enough. With boys, as with girls, the HPV vaccine is most effective when it’s given before sexual activity exposes people to the virus, federal health experts say.
Cost is another factor with some health care providers as well as parents balking at covering the expensive vaccine which costs $130 a dose. The vaccinations for boys 11-14 is expected to cost about $140 million annually.
An estimated 50 percent to 80 percent of men and women are infected with HPV in their lifestimes, although most clear the infection without developing symptoms or illness, according to the CDC.
CDC Headquarters, Atlanta, Georgia
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
timmy
|
 |
Has no life at all |
Location: UK, in Devon
Registered: February 2003
Messages: 13750
|
|
|
Interesting. We had this topic on the forum almost exactly a year ago! The upshot is that, to prevent HPV which can cause cancers of sexually involved areas ranging form vagina and cervix to anus and mouth/throat, boys as well as girls should receive a vaccination.
What I don't understand is the gay part. What am I missing here? Is it that the vaccine prevents contracting HPV, or is it that it prevents it being able to be transmitted? I'm having difficulty getting to grips with the article.
Author of Queer Me! Halfway Between Flying and Crying - the true story of life for a gay boy in the Swinging Sixties in a British all male Public School
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I agree, what the hell does HPV have to do with being gay?
If there is a higher incidence of the disease in the female population then I would imagine they are the source of the problem for males. Oral sex is just as prevelant in male-female activity where pregnancy is an issue to be avoided. There is also a large group of kids in favor of male to female anal sex as a means of contraception and that is risky behavior.
Any form of unprotected sex is unwise in this day and age. HPV may be the new scare but AIDS is still out there along with other STD's. Those who would object to their boys receiving a vaccine are flirting with disaster.
Age appears to be best in four things; old wood best to burn, old wine to drink, old friends to trust, and old authors to read. (Sir Francis Bacon 1561-1626)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Chris & Tim....
The problem IS that parents are going to lose the plot over the 'anal cancer' & oral sex aspects of the HPV vaccination's preventative properties.
Please re-read what the good Doctor from Georgetown stated in my piece.
Also, consider that in the U. S., Americans are so bloody uptight about sexuality of ANY kind in terms of discussions with young folk, there is a VERY large percentage of the parental population that don't discuss nor would acknowledge that their kids are fucking, sucking, etc.
Plus there is so much bad info that's passed out there, again, look at what Bachmann said about the vaccination causing 'mental retardation.'
The Gay part is that there are way too many LGBTQ youth who are not given proper information to make good decisions about their sexual health. Not to mention the tons of aforementioned uptight parents who wouldn't WANT their kids to have that info- forget acknowledging that they have produced a LGBTQ progeny.
For more info please visit: http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/gaylesbianandtransgenderhealth.html
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
timmy
|
|
Has no life at all |
Location: UK, in Devon
Registered: February 2003
Messages: 13750
|
|
|
If they want to major on gay male youth then they emphasise anal cancer too much, surely? On the balance of probabilities, assuming Kinsey was even close, 10% of boys will be gay, of whom perhaps only half will have penetrative anal sex, and of whom perhaps only a third will choose to be penetrated.
With those figures, unless the CDC can give me a convincing reason to have my heterosexual son (0.9 probability) vaccinated, it just is not going to happen.
I have read and reread the piece. Their press release makes it harder to understand, not easier.
Author of Queer Me! Halfway Between Flying and Crying - the true story of life for a gay boy in the Swinging Sixties in a British all male Public School
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Let me quote Tim: [...] "With those figures, unless the CDC can give me a convincing reason to have my heterosexual son (0.9 probability) vaccinated, it just is not going to happen."
Reality check folks, STRAIGHT boys have oral sex with their female partners as well as anal sex. IF that female is infected with the HPV virus? Yup, it just got transmitted. Same holds true for the Gay boys too.
{According the medical experts I talked with at both the CDC and the National Institutes For Health here in Washington- the point is to get the kids vaccinated BEFORE they become sexually active.}
Oh yes, the religious bigots have already weighed in:
The Family Research Council has issued a statement in reaction to yesterday's CDC recommendation that boys get the HPV vaccine too.
The CDC is quick to point out that the vaccine also protects against anal, mouth, and throat cancer--but they downplay the fact that these cancers are almost entirely the result of men having homosexual sex! Apart from the cost of the shots (upwards of $140 million a year), perhaps the most infuriating aspect of all this is the government's insistence that we look for ways to minimize the impact of promiscuity instead of working to encourage the end of it. Rather than asking young people to change their behavior, society is scrambling to enable it. It's like trying to address the problem of drunk driving by making better airbags. We can't tackle long-term safety with short-term solutions. And unfortunately, tiptoeing around the fundamental problem--premarital sex and homosexual sex--shows how far off course we are.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Aussie- The sad thing is that the blogger you linked to is an activist, not a journalist.
Take the so-called 'lead' paragraph: "In a shocking display of utter corruption and ignorance, a US Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) advisory committee has officially"
Corruption & Ignorance? Shocking display? I hate to inform him, but there's NEVER been a shocking 'anything' about the CDC.
Then he writes: "Despite the fact that males do not even have a cervix, 12 of the 14 CDC committee members decided that vaccinating boys as young as nine against the virus is still a good idea."
This 'alleged' journalist is just as bad as the wing-nuts on the rights who decry the vaccination because of the 'Gay' factor. The point is to protect the girls against transmission along with boys against 2 types of cancer.
Finally- the rest of this so-called 'report' degenerates into an anti-establishment rant against the pharmaceutics firm that produces the vaccine.
It is a classic study of a blogger running amok without bothering to present factual evidence in an opposing view by medical experts.
By the way, I am not advocating for or against the HPV vaccination, but as a journalist reporting on it and the controversial nature of the story.
I feel that a CREDIBLE opposing viewpoint is excellent- but not this guy.
|
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
|
] 
A Place of Safety
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
Re: I'm missing something here. 
