Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

HPV vaccination reduces oncogenic HPV16/18 prevalence from 16% to <1% in Denmark

eurosurveillance.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 383 posts

Re: HPV vaccination reduces oncogenic HPV16/18 prevalence from 16% to <1% in Denmark

#121

Post by tialaramex »

hammock wrote: post #97
stared wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But this misunderstands how HPV works. First, there are many strains. Typical tests for oncogenic variants measure around 30 types. The vaccine I received (Gardasil-9, which I took as a male at age 35) protects against nine specific strains. Second, the body normally clears HPV naturally after 1-2 years. However, natural infection often does not provide immunity, so reinfection can easily occur (even from the same pa…

Does the vaccine guarantee immunity, by contrast?

It's never a guarantee in practice, the CDC says "More than 98% of recipients develop an antibody response to HPV types included in the respective vaccines 1 month after completing a full vaccination series"

Re: HPV vaccination reduces oncogenic HPV16/18 prevalence from 16% to <1% in Denmark

#122

Post by tokai »

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #119
elric wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apparently HPV is responsible for some ~70% of throat cancers and ~30% of penile cancers in men. Seems pretty significant to me. If nobody knows a guy who knows a guy who had penile cancer, that's probably because people are very bad about talking about genital health. I'm sure some of the men in my life have issues with erectile dysfunction, enlarged prostates, hemmorrhoids, etc. But no one is talking about those is…

70% of throat cancers? In a world with cigarettes and chewing tobacco? I find that a very surprising number - so surprising it's almost unbelievable. Got a source?

"Currently, the estimated proportion of oropharyngeal cancers testing positive for HPV within the United States is 68%–70%"[0]

[0] https://www.asha.org/practice-portal/clinical-topics/head-an...

Re: HPV vaccination reduces oncogenic HPV16/18 prevalence from 16% to <1% in Denmark

#123

Post by albatross79 »

jmpman wrote: post #84
albatross79 wrote: post #75

[flagged]

You sound like my fellow citizens who have decided to use their theocratic power to push this view across my city and school. It impacts my children and their future mates. Sure, there’s an ideal world in which every person finds their ideal partner on the first time, falls madly in love and remains forever faithful. I don’t live in a Disney fantasy world, and would prefer public health policies are based on pragmati…

If you prefer public health policies you prefer the solution for the lowest common denominator.

Re: HPV vaccination reduces oncogenic HPV16/18 prevalence from 16% to <1% in Denmark

#124

Post by 1121redblackgo »

hammock wrote: post #93
torben-friis wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there any issue for adult males vaccinating ? I seem to remember some mention of risk by my doctor when I asked about it, but I might be misremembering.

There is currently no vaccine that is zero risk

and in the same breathe, the risk is closer to zero than not.

Re: HPV vaccination reduces oncogenic HPV16/18 prevalence from 16% to <1% in Denmark

#125

Post by sneak »

jacquesm wrote: post #9
spiderfarmer wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sadly, no matter how good the data is, some societies will value opinions of uninformed celebrities above facts and reason, leading to a resurgence of preventable diseases.

These celebrities should serve some jailtime. Quackery is criminal, it kills people.

Telling lies should never be criminalized, because there is no single trustworthy arbiter of truth.

This has nothing to do with vaccines. There is a very good reason that misinformation is, and should remain legal. This simply allows the person or group who gets to define what is or is not misinformation to arbitrarily imprison anyone doing publishing they don’t like.

You really need to think through the implications and consequences of censorship laws before advocating for them.

Re: HPV vaccination reduces oncogenic HPV16/18 prevalence from 16% to <1% in Denmark

#126

Post by gizmo686 »

michaelrpeskin wrote: post #89
phkahler wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> HPVs are extremely common: 80% of men and 90% of women will have at least one strain in their lives. This statistic seems to be used by some people to avoid the vaccine - they figure they've already had it at some point. The biggest problem with that logic is that not all strains are as dangerous and they probably have not contracted 16 or 18 specifically. The other problem is there's still a good number of people…

Yeah, I only read the abstract and looked at the plots, but this is what I hate about public health papers: They say the prevalence of virus is down. They don't say that the cancer rate is down (granted too early to tell), nor do they talk about any adverse events or all cause mortality differences (again, probably too early to tell) The only thing they can conclude is that the treatment given to stop the virus, stop…

Research papers are not literature reviews. This paper reports on the results of this study. And that study only investigated what it investigated.

In the case of public health, there are a bunch of organizations that keep on top of the research and maintain a more comprehensive view of their perception of the current consensus.

For day to day guidance, individuals should be referring to either those sources, or healthcare professionals.

If people are looking at individual studies like this to make decisions, something has gone very wrong.

Re: HPV vaccination reduces oncogenic HPV16/18 prevalence from 16% to <1% in Denmark

#127

Post by stared »

yieldcrv wrote: post #99
elric wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I, a male, got vaccinated with the Gardasil 9 vaccine shortly before turning 40. Convincing my doctor to prescribe it wasn't terribly difficult, I told them a few things about my sexual history and explained some of my sexual plans, and that was that. I wish more people would get vaccinated.

Best of luck, the reason it took so long for males to be approved for Gardasil use and they slowly keep pushing it up by age is two fold: 1) if you've ever been exposed to HPV already, then the vaccine is useless 2) there is no test to determine if a male has been exposed, although there is one for females so they just push the ages up by probability, over time. As the probability of a man being with an older and the…

> 2) there is no test to determine if a male has been exposed, although there is one for females

It is incorrect. I had it tested multiple times. It is done less routinely, usually under assumption that since it is women who are mostly at risk, why bother testing men. Which is horrible mindset in anything related to epidemiology.

See:

- https://www.droracle.ai/articles/607248/what-methods-are-use...

- https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12256477/

- https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/22221751.2024.2...

> 1) if you've ever been exposed to HPV already, then the vaccine is useless

Also no. See other comments.

Re: HPV vaccination reduces oncogenic HPV16/18 prevalence from 16% to <1% in Denmark

#128

Post by sneak »

jacquesm wrote: post #102
bethekidyouwant wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But maybe you have fallen into a trap? Maybe believing in crystals is their own damn fault rather that jailing “influencers” for inducing wrong-think.

People are gullible. Those that prey on the gullible are culpable, the gullible have problems enough as it is.

I think those who advocate for censorship are gullible and have fallen for the bush-league trap of believing that the state is on your side and exists to benefit you.

Re: HPV vaccination reduces oncogenic HPV16/18 prevalence from 16% to <1% in Denmark

#129

Post by stared »

gnerd00 wrote: post #112
stared wrote: post #40

I would like to add: - HPVs are extremely common: 80% of men and 90% of women will have at least one strain in their lives. Unless you plan to remain completely celibate, you are likely to contract a strain. - Sooner is better, but vaccination can be done at any age. Guidelines often lag behind, but vaccination makes sense even if you are currently HPV-positive. While it won't clear an existing infection, it protects…

[flagged]

"I know no-one who died from hunger, therefore hunger does not exist, famine is a scam."

A quick find: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Deaths_from_throat_ca...

Re: HPV vaccination reduces oncogenic HPV16/18 prevalence from 16% to <1% in Denmark

#130

Post by peab »

timr wrote: post #120
hammock wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does the vaccine guarantee immunity, by contrast?

Parent is overstating the case. Neither infection nor vaccination provides sterilizing immunity [1], but the general reasons to prefer vaccination are (in order of descending quality of evidence & reasoning): 1) you probably haven't had all N strains yet. 2a) you likely haven't been infected with the ones that cause cancer, because they're relatively rare. 2b) ...that is especially true if you're young and not sexual…

What if you're married? Does it still make sense, if you know you won't ever be sleeping with a new partner?
Post reply on HN