1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
Dismiss Notice
Hey Guest!
The donation button is here.
https://goo.gl/aFggcs

Gardasil Vaccine

Discussion in 'Tilted Life and Sexuality' started by ASU2003, Jun 10, 2019 at 1:06 AM.

  1. ASU2003

    ASU2003 Very Tilted

    Location:
    Where ever I roam
  2. AlwaysCurious

    AlwaysCurious Vertical

    Location:
    Great Britain
    In the UK girls in school i think aged 12 or so have the option of getting the vaccine because, and most people do. I think there was only a few people who didn't get it at school (they got it at the doctor's instead, maybe they were nervous about needles and didn't want their personal to see).

    I've since aged out of schooling, and I think boys get the vaccine as well now, even though it's against what causes cervical cancer, and males don't have a cervix. However. The vaccine is against a strain of viruses which can be passed along sexually. I.e. STIs. Piv, oral etc.

    If people contract these viruses, females specifically have an increased risk of getting cervical cancer. And I think (can't remember that well), that for both genders, it prevents oral/throat cancers.

    I think anyone who ever plans on having sex and also wants to reduce their chances of getting cancer / passing on someone something which gives then cancer, should have this vaccine.


    Source: received vaccine. Read the leaflet that comes with it. Am also a biologist.



    Tl;Dr : yes, unless someone has allergies to this specific vaccine. Everyone should receive this vaccine to reduce cancer incidence. One of the most easily preventable cancers. Australia's vaccine rate is among one of the highest and if I remember well, the specific cancer incidence rates have fallen there.
     
    • Like Like x 3
  3. fflowley

    fflowley Don't just do something, stand there! Donor

    • Like Like x 2
  4. genuinemommy

    genuinemommy Moderator Staff Member

    I think there is an age window when it is the most effective, which is why it is not given to infants. It used to be less effective on people over the age of 20, from what I recall?
    I should check on that.
     
  5. AlwaysCurious

    AlwaysCurious Vertical

    Location:
    Great Britain
    Good point, it probably loses effectiveness at a certain age , especially if you have already have interacted with someone who carries the virus in a benign way.



    Sent from my ONEPLUS A6003 using Tapatalk
     
  6. PonyPotato

    PonyPotato Very Tilted

    Location:
    Columbus, OH
    It is not necessarily less effective, it is less studied above a particular age. Those who have been sexually active for a while have likely already been exposed to HPV, and it turns out that the vaccine after exposure may actually cause symptoms when they weren’t present before. So yes, get the vaccine, but preferably get it in your children before they have any exposure.

    I received the series prior to the 9 strain vaccine. I had already been exposed to at least one strain of HPV and I just had a biopsy done a few weeks ago for a very fragile area of perineal skin that showed that HPV symptoms are present. I had previously had 2 abnormal paps followed by at least 5 normal paps, and these symptoms weren’t present before the vaccine. Who knows?
     
    • Like Like x 2
  7. Herculite

    Herculite Slightly Tilted

    Its now approved for women under 45 (IIRC) but my wife got it a few years ago at her doctors recommendation (despite her not knowing we are swingers) when the recommended age was 26. I have not had it but I probably should, they are doing it for boys now, but dunno about us old men.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  8. ASU2003

    ASU2003 Very Tilted

    Location:
    Where ever I roam
    It is for guys under 45 too, but even the company's website hasn't been updated yet.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  9. AlwaysCurious

    AlwaysCurious Vertical

    Location:
    Great Britain
  10. ASU2003

    ASU2003 Very Tilted

    Location:
    Where ever I roam
    I probably should get the vaccine. It is a process to get it though. 3 shots spaced out over a few months, and I would probably have to go to Planned Parenthood to get it.

    It has been out for a while now and given to enough people that I consider it safe. I am not in a high risk group of getting HPV, but at some point that might change.
     
  11. AlwaysCurious

    AlwaysCurious Vertical

    Location:
    Great Britain
    It should never be a thought process that enough people have had it that you can consider it safe.

    Ever.

    It costs millions if not billions to get effective medications out there, due to the extensive testing that medicine goes through.
    Yes I'm incredibly subjective. But I am colleagues with people working their ass off to try and get incredibly important medication to people who's lives depend on it. It's expensive and it's hard work. People who spend 18 hour days at work.
    Medication doesn't go out to the public just so that lucky people in the west can pick and choose.
    So many people would love to have the freedom and money and time to have all this medication that we take for granted.
    Medication that wouldn't be made available to the public if it was unsafe.

    Please. Consider your words.
     
  12. fflowley

    fflowley Don't just do something, stand there! Donor

    While it is a laborious and scientifically rigorous process to get a medicine FDA approved for public use, it is not an infallible process.
    I prescribe some of the most heavily studied and toxic medications known to man and I can tell you we often learn new things about these medications after they have been FDA approved and marketed for years.
    That's why the FDA conducts post approval surveillance on medications.
    Are you aware that some medications have been pulled from the market after approval because toxicities became apparent that were not seen in the clinical trials that led to approval?
    And remember that medications generally get approved based on short term response and safety data. Long term data accrues once the medications are already approved and in widespread use.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  13. AlwaysCurious

    AlwaysCurious Vertical

    Location:
    Great Britain
    I agree and understand what you're saying. Thalidomide is the obvious example.
    But I think waiting to see whether or not people get hurt because of medication before you take it yourself seems unethical in itself. Especially when the medication is for preventing cancer.

    No medication is without risk, I know. But the work that researcher, the FDA and global equivalents of that, other people in healthcare....nobody in those sectors does that work, puts all that time and money and heart ache into it, just so people can be skeptical about medication in the first place.

    Yes medications are monitored post release, as they should be.
    But that doesn't mean they haven't been cleared for safety as far as the professionals know. And that doesn't mean that the medications aren't out there to serve a vital function in the first place. No-one in the field wants people to get hurt.