Oral sex-related cancer at 30-year high - New Scientist, 2/28/08

[Gibsons]

Originally posted by: BD2003

Originally posted by: Gibsons

Originally posted by: BD2003

Originally posted by: Gibsons

Originally posted by: BD2003

Originally posted by: thecoolnessrune

Originally posted by: SirStev0

Originally posted by: ironwing
I blame Bill Clinton.

I blame the religious right for lobbying the HPV vaccine for so long...

I blame people thinking that the partner they're with that night is safe. Too much unsafe, rampant forms of sex. That's not a plug at abstinence. That's just plain fact. If people would only at least get to know the partner they're with then the cases would drop dramatically. But all we have is a horrid case of "Where can I stick my dick next?!" (And I'm not just blaming males, females are equally at fault).

With one partner, I will only have to ask her to be tested once. And I won't worry about it again. Could she cheat on me with someone who does? Sure.. But my chances are still lower than if I'm in bed with a new girl each night.

I'll just leave it at that.

HPV is ubiquitous. Its so prevalent, that if you're over age 26, they dont recommend women even bother with gardasil as its extremely likely theyve already been infected. Hate to break it to you, but even if your tongue has hit the vulva only once, you're probably already screwed.

I don't think that's correct. Link

What's really important are the high risk types (16 and 18 in particular), which are pretty rare overall . So even if you're infected by the more common types, the vaccination should protect against infection with the high risk types.

Its correct, I do this for a living. I'm screening a pap smear right now even.

HPV 16 and 18 arent all that rare. Them causing cancer is relatively rare (less than 1 in 10,000 if youre infected), but cervical cancer without 16 or 18 is nearly non-existent. Its not as if your immune system is unable to fight off 16 or 18, but its thought that repeated exposure is what really causes the problem. The point of gardasil is to have those immune defenses ready before even the first exposure, but once you've been exposed, its fairly pointless.

I posted the wrong link. Read this.

Or the pertinent part: "Among US females 14 through 59 years old, the combined prevalence of HPV-6, HPV-11, HPV-16, and HPV-18 was 3.4%. The prevalence of each vaccine type was as follows: HPV-6, 1.3%; HPV-11, 0.1%; HPV-16, 1.5%; and HPV-18, 0.8%. The combined prevalence of the 2 high-risk types, HPV-16 and HPV-18, was approximately 2% (1.5% + 0.8% ? 0.1% who have both)."

Prevalence isnt the issue - incidence is.

Same conclusion. When they looked at prevalence, they were looking at seroprevalence, meaning they could get a positive result in the absence of active disease.

Here's another study looking at incidence specifically.
Link

Person-years of exposure ranged by type-specific analysis from 2,645 to 3,188, with an incidence rate per 100 person-years of 3.6 for HPV-6, 0.4 for HPV-11, 5.4 for HPV-16, and 2.1 for HPV-18.

 

[Svnla]

You are what you eat.

 

[BD2003]

Originally posted by: Gibsons

Originally posted by: BD2003

Originally posted by: Gibsons

Originally posted by: BD2003

Originally posted by: Gibsons

Originally posted by: BD2003

Originally posted by: thecoolnessrune

Originally posted by: SirStev0

Originally posted by: ironwing
I blame Bill Clinton.

I blame the religious right for lobbying the HPV vaccine for so long...

I blame people thinking that the partner they're with that night is safe. Too much unsafe, rampant forms of sex. That's not a plug at abstinence. That's just plain fact. If people would only at least get to know the partner they're with then the cases would drop dramatically. But all we have is a horrid case of "Where can I stick my dick next?!" (And I'm not just blaming males, females are equally at fault).

With one partner, I will only have to ask her to be tested once. And I won't worry about it again. Could she cheat on me with someone who does? Sure.. But my chances are still lower than if I'm in bed with a new girl each night.

I'll just leave it at that.

HPV is ubiquitous. Its so prevalent, that if you're over age 26, they dont recommend women even bother with gardasil as its extremely likely theyve already been infected. Hate to break it to you, but even if your tongue has hit the vulva only once, you're probably already screwed.

I don't think that's correct. Link

What's really important are the high risk types (16 and 18 in particular), which are pretty rare overall . So even if you're infected by the more common types, the vaccination should protect against infection with the high risk types.

Its correct, I do this for a living. I'm screening a pap smear right now even.

HPV 16 and 18 arent all that rare. Them causing cancer is relatively rare (less than 1 in 10,000 if youre infected), but cervical cancer without 16 or 18 is nearly non-existent. Its not as if your immune system is unable to fight off 16 or 18, but its thought that repeated exposure is what really causes the problem. The point of gardasil is to have those immune defenses ready before even the first exposure, but once you've been exposed, its fairly pointless.

I posted the wrong link. Read this.

Or the pertinent part: "Among US females 14 through 59 years old, the combined prevalence of HPV-6, HPV-11, HPV-16, and HPV-18 was 3.4%. The prevalence of each vaccine type was as follows: HPV-6, 1.3%; HPV-11, 0.1%; HPV-16, 1.5%; and HPV-18, 0.8%. The combined prevalence of the 2 high-risk types, HPV-16 and HPV-18, was approximately 2% (1.5% + 0.8% ? 0.1% who have both)."

Prevalence isnt the issue - incidence is.

Same conclusion. When they looked at prevalence, they were looking at seroprevalence, meaning they could get a positive result in the absence of active disease.

Here's another study looking at incidence specifically.
Link

Person-years of exposure ranged by type-specific analysis from 2,645 to 3,188, with an incidence rate per 100 person-years of 3.6 for HPV-6, 0.4 for HPV-11, 5.4 for HPV-16, and 2.1 for HPV-18.

You have to take into account the risk of exposure throughout an entire lifetime. That study is looking at a specific subset of young women for a specific subset of HPV 6, 11 16 and 18. Those strains get all the press, to the point where you'd think theyre the only strains that can cause condylomas or neoplasia. Theres at least a dozen more high-risk types that can cause a high-grade precancerous lesion, and a dozen more low risk types that can cause condylomas, but theyre not as prevalent... for now. The jury is still out whether or not they will become more prevalent should there be widespread vaccination of 6,11,16,18. Hell, the jury is still out on how long gardasil will even last.

http://www.wrongdiagnosis.com/...mavirus/prevalence.htm

"Approximately twenty million people are currently infected with HPV. Fifty to 75% of sexually active men and women acquire genital HPV infection at some point in their lives. About 5.5 million Americans get a new genital HPV infection each year. (Source: excerpt from HPV: DSTD) ... An estimated 20 million people in the United states are infected with HPV, and as many as 5.5 million new infections occur each year. (Source: excerpt from Sexually Transmitted Diseases Statistics, NIAID Fact Sheet: NIAID) "

And condoms arent a failsafe barrier - most warts you cant even see with the naked eye - its a not blood to blood transfer as it is with HIV.

 

[Gibsons]

Originally posted by: BD2003

Originally posted by: Gibsons

Originally posted by: BD2003

Originally posted by: Gibsons

Originally posted by: BD2003

Originally posted by: Gibsons

Originally posted by: BD2003

Originally posted by: thecoolnessrune

Originally posted by: SirStev0

Originally posted by: ironwing
I blame Bill Clinton.

I blame the religious right for lobbying the HPV vaccine for so long...

I blame people thinking that the partner they're with that night is safe. Too much unsafe, rampant forms of sex. That's not a plug at abstinence. That's just plain fact. If people would only at least get to know the partner they're with then the cases would drop dramatically. But all we have is a horrid case of "Where can I stick my dick next?!" (And I'm not just blaming males, females are equally at fault).

With one partner, I will only have to ask her to be tested once. And I won't worry about it again. Could she cheat on me with someone who does? Sure.. But my chances are still lower than if I'm in bed with a new girl each night.

I'll just leave it at that.

HPV is ubiquitous. Its so prevalent, that if you're over age 26, they dont recommend women even bother with gardasil as its extremely likely theyve already been infected. Hate to break it to you, but even if your tongue has hit the vulva only once, you're probably already screwed.

I don't think that's correct. Link

What's really important are the high risk types (16 and 18 in particular), which are pretty rare overall . So even if you're infected by the more common types, the vaccination should protect against infection with the high risk types.

Its correct, I do this for a living. I'm screening a pap smear right now even.

HPV 16 and 18 arent all that rare. Them causing cancer is relatively rare (less than 1 in 10,000 if youre infected), but cervical cancer without 16 or 18 is nearly non-existent. Its not as if your immune system is unable to fight off 16 or 18, but its thought that repeated exposure is what really causes the problem. The point of gardasil is to have those immune defenses ready before even the first exposure, but once you've been exposed, its fairly pointless.

I posted the wrong link. Read this.

Or the pertinent part: "Among US females 14 through 59 years old, the combined prevalence of HPV-6, HPV-11, HPV-16, and HPV-18 was 3.4%. The prevalence of each vaccine type was as follows: HPV-6, 1.3%; HPV-11, 0.1%; HPV-16, 1.5%; and HPV-18, 0.8%. The combined prevalence of the 2 high-risk types, HPV-16 and HPV-18, was approximately 2% (1.5% + 0.8% ? 0.1% who have both)."

Prevalence isnt the issue - incidence is.

Same conclusion. When they looked at prevalence, they were looking at seroprevalence, meaning they could get a positive result in the absence of active disease.

Here's another study looking at incidence specifically.
Link

Person-years of exposure ranged by type-specific analysis from 2,645 to 3,188, with an incidence rate per 100 person-years of 3.6 for HPV-6, 0.4 for HPV-11, 5.4 for HPV-16, and 2.1 for HPV-18.

You have to take into account the risk of exposure throughout an entire lifetime. That study is looking at a specific subset of young women for a specific subset of HPV 6, 11 16 and 18. Those strains get all the press, to the point where you'd think theyre the only strains that can cause condylomas or neoplasia. Theres at least a dozen more high-risk types that can cause a high-grade precancerous lesion, and a dozen more low risk types that can cause condylomas, but theyre not as prevalent... for now. The jury is still out whether or not they will become more prevalent should there be widespread vaccination of 6,11,16,18. Hell, the jury is still out on how long gardasil will even last.

http://www.wrongdiagnosis.com/...mavirus/prevalence.htm

"Approximately twenty million people are currently infected with HPV. Fifty to 75% of sexually active men and women acquire genital HPV infection at some point in their lives. About 5.5 million Americans get a new genital HPV infection each year. (Source: excerpt from HPV: DSTD) ... An estimated 20 million people in the United states are infected with HPV, and as many as 5.5 million new infections occur each year. (Source: excerpt from Sexually Transmitted Diseases Statistics, NIAID Fact Sheet: NIAID) "

And condoms arent a failsafe barrier - most warts you cant even see with the naked eye - its a not blood to blood transfer as it is with HIV.

I'm aware of all of that (I do this for a living too). The question is whether the vaccine is of use, so we can restrict the discussion to the 4 types covered by the vaccine.

 

[BD2003]

I'm aware of all of that (I do this for a living too). The question is whether the vaccine is of use, so we can restrict the discussion to the 4 types covered by the vaccine.

Someone would have to be the guinea pig, but these kinds of HPV related squamous cancers usually take decades to develop. The article makes it sound like you're going to lick the wrong vag and get oral cancer, and it just doesnt work like that.

The chances of contracting HPV orally are pretty low, the chance of that HPV lesion progressing into cancer is extremely low, and that chance of that occuring before age 50 or so is *ridiculously* low.

Smoking and having VAST amounts of oral sex is where the risk likely is, as high grade lesions that cause cancer tend to do so in certain types of cells not usually found near the mouth, but smoking can irritate those tissues into changing over.