41–50 of 147 posts
Reminder that HPV in men has a similar association to oral/anal cancer, and this vaccine (ideally the quadrivalent version) prevents it too [0]. HPV vaccine campaigns often emphasize vaccinating only girls, but boys should be vaccinated too. [0] https://academic.oup.com/jnci/advance-article-abstract/doi/1...
[flagged]
Why did she believe that? I like to believe are politicians aren’t completely insane so what pseudo/bad whatever studies led her to believe vaccines cause mental retardation?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The CDC recommends against it. The CDC does not recommend against getting vaccinated for people in their 30s. They don't issue a general recommendation for vaccinating people in their 30s. That's an extremely important distinction.
I'll update that to "The CDC doesn't recommend it", in that case.
As a native speaker, even that language feels as though the CDC discourages vaccination despite the literal meaning not implying that. This is a case where it's probably best to be more verbose and explain in full details.
I don't know why the CDC themselves choose to use this language. It's confusing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's incredibly charitable of you to assume this was based on some sort of good-faith investigation of reputable medical research on her part.
Well there is research around it, it isn’t robust enough to make stupid claims like that, but you could make a decent case that older vaccines contained things (Thimerosal) which could be causing problems. Maybe she doesn’t understand most new ones don’t?
No, not really; there's no case to be made there. Long and conclusively debunked, and the removal of it from most vaccinations didn't change autism etc. rates at all. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thiomersal_and_vaccines
> Maybe she doesn’t understand most new ones don’t?
Little in Michele Bachmann's career gives me reason to give her that much benefit of the doubt.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The CDC doesn't recommend it. By that age, you've probably been exposed already. https://www.cdc.gov/hpv/parents/vaccine-for-hpv.html > HPV vaccination is not recommended for everyone older than age 26 years. Some adults ages 27 through 45 years who were not already vaccinated might choose to get HPV vaccine after speaking with their doctor about their risk for new HPV infections and possible benefits of vaccination…
I don't understand why they recommend against it. I guess the monetary costs don't outweigh the benefits, but that's only if you care more about saving money than potentially preventing cancer. It's not like the vaccine going to hurt you. But the HPV vaccine is not particularly cheap, so it sounds like the insurance companies have lobbied against it or something. In my opinion men should also be vaccinated for it sin…
I guess if you were 50 and still a virgin, and planning to change that, it might be worth it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'll update that to "The CDC doesn't recommend it", in that case.
> I'll update that to "The CDC doesn't recommend it", in that case. As a native speaker, even that language feels as though the CDC discourages vaccination despite the literal meaning not implying that. This is a case where it's probably best to be more verbose and explain in full details. I don't know why the CDC themselves choose to use this language. It's confusing.
It seems a little strange to me that the people interviewed in this article find this is so remarkable. Only 40,000 people belonged to the group that got the vaccine before 14. If the incidence rate were the same as for the unvaccinated (8.4 per 100k) you would have expected roughly 4 in the group to have gotten cancer. If the incidence rate were the same as for those vaccinated after 14 (3.2 per 100k), you would hav…
> Maybe I'm missing something here? Statistical literacy is difficult to develop, statistical intuition even moreso, even among well-intentioned and very intelligent people.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's incredibly charitable of you to assume this was based on some sort of good-faith investigation of reputable medical research on her part.
Well there is research around it, it isn’t robust enough to make stupid claims like that, but you could make a decent case that older vaccines contained things (Thimerosal) which could be causing problems. Maybe she doesn’t understand most new ones don’t?
If you don’t understand such things and make unsubstantiated, incorrect claims on a national stage as a presidential candidate, I have a lot less tolerance.
The continuing focus on cervical cancer and women’s sexual health in the context of HPV (vaccination) is my biggest pet peeve ever. HPV causes penile, anal, mouth-throat and cervical cancer. I‘d argue that all of those cancers are much, much worse than cervical cancer. After all, they can cause permanent disfigurement, chronic pain, inability to ever speak again and loss of the penis. Infertility? Woe is me! Anyone w…
They are offering the HPV vaccine for boy too. Hell my doctor suggested it, and I got it, a couple of years ago as a late 20s male.
Maybe today that has been fixed.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The CDC doesn't recommend it. By that age, you've probably been exposed already. https://www.cdc.gov/hpv/parents/vaccine-for-hpv.html > HPV vaccination is not recommended for everyone older than age 26 years. Some adults ages 27 through 45 years who were not already vaccinated might choose to get HPV vaccine after speaking with their doctor about their risk for new HPV infections and possible benefits of vaccination…
I don't understand why they recommend against it. I guess the monetary costs don't outweigh the benefits, but that's only if you care more about saving money than potentially preventing cancer. It's not like the vaccine going to hurt you. But the HPV vaccine is not particularly cheap, so it sounds like the insurance companies have lobbied against it or something. In my opinion men should also be vaccinated for it sin…