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

231–240 of 383 posts

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

#231

Post by odie5533 »

downrightmike wrote: post #213
shevy-java wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Unless you plan to remain completely celibate You can get HPV without sex too. https://www.cdc.gov/sti/about/about-genital-hpv-infection.ht... "HPV is most commonly spread during vaginal or anal sex. It also spreads through close skin-to-skin touching during sex" This focuses on sex, but any virus that can be found on skin, also has a chance to be transmitted without sex just as well. Admittedly the chance here for…

Foot warts are HPV, like from the Gym locker room

But they are not HPV16/18 and so not covered by this vaccine.

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

#232

Post by devinplatt »

arjie wrote: post #227
devinplatt wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Try Planned Parenthood. Over a decade ago I tried getting the HPV vaccine in my early 20s, but the doctor told me it wasn't recommended for men and that insurance won't cover it. I was young and didn't have the money to pay out of pocket. I went to Planned Parenthood and got the vaccine last year. At some point they changed the recommendation to men under 45 now and I got all 3 shots free. Honestly, though I'm glad t…

Oh that's interesting. Thank you. I have a friend who works there as a provider. I should be able to check before going.

That's great!

For more context, I have Anthem Blue Cross health insurance. The cost might depend on your insurance.

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

#233

Post by wat10000 »

miroljub wrote: post #162
andrepd wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're replying on a post that shows a literal >16x reduction in prevalence, with "just don't be a slut, worked for thousands of years". I'd invite you to look up the prevalence of STDs during the most puritanical eras and places, maybe you'd change that stupid take.

[flagged]

Why is a marginal benefit bad?

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

#234

Post by tiahura »

odie5533 wrote: post #231
downrightmike wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Foot warts are HPV, like from the Gym locker room

But they are not HPV16/18 and so not covered by this vaccine.

There is some clinical evidence of other strain effect. See pediatric dermatology article from a year or two ago.

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

#236

Post by jgerrish »

tehjoker wrote: post #220
timr wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You missed three very important caveats that complicate the story you’re trying to tell: 1) not every strain of HPV causes cancer (iirc, the bad ones are rare). 2) many people (in fact, most people) who are active in the world have been infected with at least one strain of HPV. 3) it’s common to have asymptomatic HPV infections. you probably have one now. one more: 4) the vaccines likely have little effect on anythin…

> 4) the vaccines likely have little effect on anything unless you were vaccinated as a child (and are a biological woman). This guidance is changing. Vaccinating men protects women. Also just because you were infected with one strain, that doesn't mean you can't contract another, possibly oncogenic one. Get vaccinated, it protects against the most common cancer-causing strains. I did, why would I want to unknowingly…

>> 4) the vaccines likely have little effect on anything unless you were vaccinated as a child (and are a biological woman).

> This guidance is changing. Vaccinating men protects women.

Yeah, it was fucking like pulling teeth getting my HPV vaccine as an adult male. "It's for teenage girls" comments from multiple health care professionals.

I only took the first fucking dose in the regime, and none of my health care providers now offer low cost or covered options. I had to spend Covid money when I had it. I still need the rest of the regime.

Thank you thread for the reminder.

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

#237

Post by sroussey »

timr wrote: post #206
0xbadcafebee wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For those men wondering whether they should get vaccinated: - HPV causes genital warts, HPV is permanent, doctors won't test you for HPV unless you demand it, and the tests aren't reliable, which is why they literally won't diagnose you unless you already have genital warts. - Once you are confirmed HPV positive (again, you won't be confirmed without getting genital warts), you need to inform your partners, as it cau…

You missed three very important caveats that complicate the story you’re trying to tell: 1) not every strain of HPV causes cancer (iirc, the bad ones are rare). 2) many people (in fact, most people) who are active in the world have been infected with at least one strain of HPV. 3) it’s common to have asymptomatic HPV infections. you probably have one now. one more: 4) the vaccines likely have little effect on anythin…

Does it not prevent cancer in the throat in men? Not sure why that would be women only.

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

#238

Post by sroussey »

pyuser583 wrote: post #133
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.

I feel very uncomfortable trying to talk my doctor into doing something they don't recommend. I know too many people who buy into fake medical stuff. Why is this different? Why is pestering a doctor to give me a medicine they don't recommend a good idea?

You need to be your own advocate.

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

#239

Post by sroussey »

oblio wrote: post #106
elric wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> However, the vaccination is expensive (~1k) Depends entirely on where you are and what your healthcare situation is. Mine cost me ~100eur.

This is ultimately an American site so you can assume 80%+ of comments come from a US background (I'm not American, I've just been here longer than I should have). (even for rest-of-the-world topics)

It’s $169 at CVS with GoodRx coupon and no insurance.

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

#240

Post by daveungerer »

electriclove wrote: post #187
rawgabbit wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I usually am pro vaccine. But the HPV vaccine discussion seems politicized to me. As someone who is monogamous and over fifty, I had trouble following the risk vs reward discussion. The CDC says it is only recommended for young adults so I interpret that for my case the answer is negative.

Same, what is the risk/reward for someone who is and plans to be monogamous. Young or old. Cost not a concern. Give me the info and let me decide for myself, my kids, my parents.

> Same, what is the risk/reward for someone who is and plans to be monogamous. Young or old. Cost not a concern. Give me the info and let me decide for myself, my kids, my parents.

Did I read this correctly? You are going to decide for your children based on their plans to be monogamous?

And you’re also going to decide for your parents? I can only assume you’re in the unfortunate situation where your parents are no longer capable of making decisions?

Post reply on HN