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

HPV vaccine study finds zero cases of cervical cancer among women vaccinated <14

statnews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–147 of 147 posts

Re: HPV vaccine study finds zero cases of cervical cancer among women vaccinated <14

#141

Post by fwungy »

ceejayoz wrote: post #140
fwungy wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't let my children do either. Imagine trading a low risk in the distant future for a low risk in the present for a healthy child? Any business person knows things that potentially happen in the distant future are to be heavily discounted, while present day risks carry full values.

> Any business person knows things that potentially happen in the distant future are to be heavily discounted, while present day risks carry full values. Any parent knows that a business folding and a child dying aren't quite the same thing.

Your child isn't going to die from cervical cancer. Kids don't get it.

Your child may die or be seriously injured by HPV vaccines. There are about 80 open class action lawsuits in process over it.

We took most of the other vaccines, but my partner and I decided the HPV vaccine was too dangerous right now, while we have happy healthy kids, to worry about the small chance that an unproven cervical cancer vaccine will work thirty years from now.

Re: HPV vaccine study finds zero cases of cervical cancer among women vaccinated <14

#142

Post by burnished »

rootusrootus wrote: post #134
burnished wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, I get the point that you couldn't muster an actual argument so resorted to an overly broad question that intentionally ignored context. And I'm not advocating for anything, I just hate the insincerity that comes from people asking questions like that. Its also a little whiffy that you're trotting out the 'some kids will make good choices' bit with regards to this age range and the ability to ask a doctor for a v…

> Yes, I get the point that you couldn't muster an actual argument Don't be a dick. It was a legitimate question. And no amount of insinuations or insults on your part changes that. Your points are very weak for someone advocating for getting the gov't more deeply involved in everyone's affairs. And if you don't think some 12 year olds are wildly incapable of making good medical choices, I don't know what to say.

I don't get it - the government is what gives you your current legal authority over your offspring, and someone suggests less of that power, and you're saying the government is getting more involved? It makes it difficult to take you seriously.

Re: HPV vaccine study finds zero cases of cervical cancer among women vaccinated <14

#143

Post by groestl »

prepend wrote: post #138
groestl wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

5-year survival rate of throat cancer is 82%, 5-year survival rate of cervical cancer is 92%, and incidence of HPV-related throat cancers among men is higher than cervical cancer on it's own and rising (probably due to changes in sexual behavior) [0]. While total incidence of HPV related cancers is higher in women than in men and that's bad enough, there is not a lot of difference. It's a problem on its own. [0] http…

It’s the incidence that is important here. So while there’s higher survivability for cervical cancer, there are many more deaths. (At least until this vaccine) So people are concerned with the risk of having throat cancer more than the risk of death if they get it. And this seems reasonable. As I have a very high risk of death in many improbable situations and I care more about lower risk of death in very common situ…

> It’s the incidence that is important here

But that's my point: the incidence of cervical cancer in women and throat cancer in men is in the same order of magnitude, but the incidence of cervical cancer is stable or even declining due to screenings and HPV vaccination, while the incidence of back of the throat cancer in men is five fold higher than throat cancer in women already. And what's more, it is rising - also five fold over the past decade - due to (unprotected) oral sex becoming more common.

Re: HPV vaccine study finds zero cases of cervical cancer among women vaccinated <14

#144

Post by ceejayoz »

fwungy wrote: post #141
ceejayoz wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Any business person knows things that potentially happen in the distant future are to be heavily discounted, while present day risks carry full values. Any parent knows that a business folding and a child dying aren't quite the same thing.

Your child isn't going to die from cervical cancer. Kids don't get it. Your child may die or be seriously injured by HPV vaccines. There are about 80 open class action lawsuits in process over it. We took most of the other vaccines, but my partner and I decided the HPV vaccine was too dangerous right now, while we have happy healthy kids, to worry about the small chance that an unproven cervical cancer vaccine will w…

> Your child isn't going to die from cervical cancer. Kids don't get it.

This is remarkably ignorant.

The vaccine prevents HPV infection. Kids absolutely do get that. HPV infection can lead to cervical cancer, and we're on an article about how it's thus most effective if administered before the age of 14.

Re: HPV vaccine study finds zero cases of cervical cancer among women vaccinated <14

#145

Post by fwungy »

It's funny how people who are afraid to click a link with a unknown domain will take any vaccine they're offered. A computer can be fixed or discarded if it's damaged by software, not an option with your body.

The USA has the most aggressive vaccine schedule for children in the world. If Vaccines are so effective we should see either lower per capita health care costs and/or superior aggregate health statistics. However US pee capita health cost are substantially higher than any other country and the health indicators are poor.

If you regressed health level on vaccination it would likely come out a non-factor. The mania around Vaccines is profit driven; greedy pharma bullies and scares everyone into buying their product, because it's the only class they have that doesn't require waiting for someone to get sick.

Re: HPV vaccine study finds zero cases of cervical cancer among women vaccinated <14

#146

Post by salad-tycoon »

ceejayoz wrote: post #98
salad-tycoon wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Funny, Apple started pushing stories to me that MEASELS IS EVERYWHERE now, get vaccinated. The advertising fund is a concern. I’m all for trust of pharmaceutical companies but a lot needs to change first.

Yes, if people stop getting vaccinated, measles starts coming back. Thus far, in small, localized outbreaks. You're supporting my point, not contesting it.

I’m saying it’s hard to separate reporting from advertising.

Also, you simply said there was no measles. I said news cycle today shows differently but the real point is if your biggest supporter is big pharma, maybe you are less inclined to investigate certain things and more inclined to accept additional fancy dinners with their experts and maybe, just maybe, that influences what is reported and how.

Re: HPV vaccine study finds zero cases of cervical cancer among women vaccinated <14

#147

Post by anonuser123456 »

ahazred8ta wrote: post #109
mensetmanusman wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

$300 per dose * 100,000:1, so about $30 million per cancer cure that has a 70% survival rate. Up to the voters I guess.

The lifetime risk of ever getting cervical cancer is about 1%. So, $30,000 per prevention if you just count the girls, or $60k if you vaccinate the boys as well.

The HPV vaccine also prevents throat cancer in boys.
Post reply on HN