Human papillomavirus (HPV) infection is the leading cause of cervical cancer among women today. However, research published February 1, 2008 indicates that HPV is also the leading cause of cancer of the tonsils, lower tongue, and upper throat (Chaturvedi, Engels, Anderson, & Gillison, 2008). The rates of HPV-related oral cancer have increased consistently in men from 1973 to 2004, such that it is now as prevalent as oral cancer caused by tobacco and alcohol. Approximately, 5600 cases annually may be attributed to infection with HPV. The increasing prevalence of HPV-related oral cancer in men may be due to the increasing frequency of oral-genital sex, in addition to the decreasing rates of tobacco use. HPV-related oral cancer has actually declined in the same time period for women.
Currently, a vaccine to prevent HPV infection, produced by Merck & Company, Inc., is only authorized by the federal government to be administered to girls, because early research focused on the risk of cervical cancer in women. However, the recent research suggests an additional reason that HPV vaccination should begin for boys as well. In fact, Merck plans to seek federal authorization for boys in the near future. In addition to oral cancer, HPV infection is also linked to increased risk for genital warts, penile cancer, and anal cancer. The recent research by Merck has only focused on the latter types of cancer, not oral cancer (Stobbe, February 1, 2008).
All of these findings lend support to arguments that boys should be vaccinated at early ages, along with girls. The vaccine is more effective if it is administered prior to HPV infection, which is the rationale for vaccinating individuals at an early age before they have first engaged in sexual behavior. Initially, the proposal to vaccinate boys was based on concern about reducing the spread of HPV to women because of its role in increasing risk of cervical cancer. With evidence indicating that HPV is associated with higher levels of oral, penile, and anal cancer among men, the vaccination of boys against HPV infection is even more compelling.
The proposal to vaccinate young girls, however, has already inflamed a good deal of controversy in a number of states and communities around the U.S. It is likely that the movement to vaccinate boys will meet with the same type of disapproval by some people.
What is your view about the issue of vaccinating girls and boys for HPV infection? Why do you suppose some people are upset about the prospect? Is it more important to protect individuals from factors known to cause cancer, or to avoid the issue because it is related to sexual behavior?
Chaturvedi, A. K., Engels, E. A., Anderson, W. F., & Gillison, M. L. (2008). Incidence trends for Human Papillomavirus–related and –unrelated oral squamous cell carcinomas in the United States. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 26, 612–619.
Stobbe, M. (February 1, 2008). HPV causing more oral cancer in men. Retrieved February 2, 2008, from http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5ip7PfN_mm2RrKX-AyRKDX9FNzzNwD8UHQ3KG0
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
82 comments:
I think that it is important to get both girls and boys vaccinated for HPV. If there are no substantial health risks in doing so, then why would you not? If you could save your child, boy or girl, from the potential risk of cancer or all of the other health related risks then I think it should be considered by all parents. I am sure that many parents are concerned with giving their child ANOTHER vaccination, due to the fact children get so many now. Another concern for a parent would be that it would give their child a false sense of security or perhaps increase their sexual experiences. In my opinion I think the pros far out weigh the cons in vaccinating your child against HPV.
It is imperative for society to overcome the barriers of the frightful word “sex”, especially when it comes to their health or the health of their children. This is a country where abstinence is the only way, although it is proven that this is not the case. Although parents would like to be blind about the subject, the truth is that with this new vaccination, being blind about sexual intercourse may actually cause your child harm. Sex is natural and will likely happen at some point. Receiving the vaccination does not mean your child will go home and become sexually active. Like many other vaccinations that have arrived on the market, only time will tell its true effects. Nonetheless, it is proven to help prevent a healthy percentage of certain types of cancer and genital warts. Therefore, if you or your children have the qualifications, it seems like a no-brainer to accept the immunization. I understand that may are concerned with the high price on this immunization, but it is important to weigh the pros and cons. $360 is nil compared to possible cancer therapy in the future. As for boys receiving the immunization, I say why not? An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.
I think people need to look at this vaccination in the same way that we look at tetanus shots or chicken pox vaccinations. Honestly, if there are really as few risks as I have read about the vaccine, why not get your child vaccinated--male or female? If this vaccine really does reduce the risk of HPV and cancer, I find it hard to fathom that a parent would want to deny that for their child. I have heard about the controversy regarding the vaccine, but I must restate what I said in the beginning, I think we just need to look at this as no different than any other vaccine that is given to children. I really cannot see a reason to consider this vaccination any different, just because it is helping to prevent a disease that is transmitted through sexual contact, does not make the vaccine any less useful.
I think it is defiantly important for both males and females to get checked for HPV. About two years ago, I had gone in for my regular testing with my doctor. When some of my testing had come back it had said that I had irregular test results. This had scared the crap out of me. I have had the same boyfriend for the longest time and knowing that neither of us had anything...or so I thought. I had gone back in and the results were explained to me that there could be a chance that I had HPV and that further testing needed to be done. As my doctor was telling me what HPV was and that men could have it and have absolutely no symptoms of it, which then could cause the spreading of it by having unprotected sex with other people. After further testing had occurred, it came back with me not having HPV and that other reason for the irregularity in the testings. For men and women to both get vaccinated in their early years this virus could be virtually stopped before cancer had its chance to get started.
I think the vaccine is a huge advance, and should be administered to both boys and girls. I’m actually surprised to learn that so much of the early research had focused on HPV, females, and the vaccination. It often seems as though research regarding disease is focused on male symptoms first, and then females (such as heart attack symptoms being different for males than females). I’ve also seen how difficult HPV can make life. One of my good friends found out she had HPV (one of the versions that can cause cancer) in her early twenties. She has to get special tests twice a year for the rest of her life to monitor any changes, and even that doesn’t guarantee finding the possible cancer in the future.
My 14-year old niece lives in Australia, and there the HPV vaccination is given to all female students, at school, in the 8th or 9th grade. I would like to see something like that here in the States, but I doubt it would happen anytime soon. Although I have a hard time understanding why something (a vaccine) is seen as sexual or offensive, some people may assume that giving this vaccine to children and young teenagers would be seen as condoning sexual activity. Yet, as a parent, I expect that my child will someday be sexually active. I want to protect my child as best I can, and if the male HPV vaccine becomes available, I will most definitely make sure he gets it.
I believe that the HPV vaccination should be given to boys and girls at the earliest age possible. If any type of cancer could possibly be prevented I'm all for it. If there aren't any weird side affects I don't see any problem with the vaccine. People need to realize children and teens are curious about sex and may start having sex at a young age. If they can be protected against certain types of cancer why not get the vaccine.
First, I found some interesting things about HPV on the internet. They caught my attention quickly. According to the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), Genital HPV is the most common STD in the US. I discovered that about 6.2 million Americans will get infected with HPV this year. By the age of 50 more than 80% of American women will have contracted at least one strain of genital HPV and they could possibly give to their male sexual partners. This sounds like a really bad problem in the US to me. I never realized how bad it really was. It’s pretty scary to think about.
The vaccine sounds like a miracle drug to me. The wikipedia encyclopedia said that in the first vaccine trial conducted in adult women showed protection against infection with HPV types 16 and 18, which cause 70% of cervical cancers, and can prevent other cancers too.
My view about the issue of vaccinating girls and boys for HPV infection is that boys probably should get the vaccine according to the information in the article I read. The article made a lot of sense to me persuading me to believe that young boys should have the vaccine before puberty and prevent them from getting HPV before they engage in sexual behavior when they are older and make that mistake.
However, the article did not present much information on the opposing side of why boys should not have the vaccine. I suppose some people are upset about the prospect and idea is maybe money, views on sex, or health. Views of the government might have a big say in how this issue is regulated as well. I researched the topic a little bit more and found that the UK in 2007 the UK government announced that all girls aged 12 and over will be vaccinated against HPV for free in a program costing over 100 million. Therefore, the US government probably does not want to spend all that money on research and administering the drugs and vaccines.
Another reason is that before they might not have had much evidence linking HPV to diseases and cancer in men like they had a good amount of evidence to women’s cancer. Now, with the new evidence of oral cancer and other problems in men I think the vaccine should be given to boys.
It is definitely more important to protect individuals from factors known to cause cancer with HPV, then to ignore and avoid the issue because it is related to sexual behavior. It’s almost as saying let people do what they want and they will have to learn the hard way from their mistakes. They might die of cancer instead of the government and health agencies recognizing the problem and coming up with a solution to a known issue.
I believe that any preventative action taken to control the spread of any disease, virus, or infection is positive. The age at which teenagers and young adults become sexually active is getting younger and more importantly, the risk of unprotected oral, vaginal, and anal sex is increased as well. This is probably due to the lack of knowledge and communication between parents and children. Having a vaccination for this is not something that people should get upset about. The doctors and researchers are trying to help the population with a difficult virus that shows up latent in women and usually not in men as women. Preventative means for this disease is smart, and is following in the trend of in the past how other vaccinations for polio, and measles have helped. Why is it any different because it is a sexually transmitted disease? Think of the positive outcomes and what we are really losing from just trying. Sexual behavior is going to be harder to control sue to the different styles of parenting, and how children and teens react to discipline and their peers. My final thoughts on the HPV vaccination with girls and boys is that both should be vaccinated for preventative and controling means.
I do not agree with boys or girls being vaccinated yet for against the HPV infection. I spoke with my doctor about the vaccine, and it seems as if very little long term research has even been performed weighing out the risks and benefits. I believe the vaccine should have long term benefits proven other than the "It could save your child, boy or girl, from the potential risk of cancer." I am not yet convinced that this vaccine is 100% beneficial in the long run. I do however feel that a parent needs to speak with their child seriously and openly about the risks and diseases out there when their child becomes sexually active. My parents had several talks with me about sex, being a teenager, I thought I knew everything, and my parents knew very little. Yet, this was the opposite. I feel like it is the duty of the parents to make sure the child is educated in all the right areas-and if they don't feel comfortable my advice to them is "GET OVER IT" DO you want your child to end up with cervical cancer or genital warts just because you were embarassed to bring up the subject?
Maybe in the next 15-20 years, with much proven to me that beneficial research has been done, will I even slightly consider the HPV vacccine for my children. Even then, we might be suprised to find out that it indeed does not protect against cancer, but promotes the cells growing rapidly out of control to cause cancer. We will just have to wait and see.
I think the vaccination of young males is a very good idea. Why wouldn't parents want to try and reduce the risk of their children getting a type cancer? If it does help to prevent cancer without any major known side effect, there doesn't seem to be any good enough reason to deny this vaccination. The parents may dislike it because it deals with sex, but this is something that can be overcome. It seems to me the possible prevention of cancer extremely outweighs the discomfort of this issue brings up. Children these days are given a number of vaccinations to begin with, so what damage could one more vaccine possibly cause? I think the vaccine should be implemented. If it was available when I have children, I would want my boy to have it.
I think that if good research indicates that it would be ideal to vaccinate both boys and girls for HPV, then it would be a good idea. Since my talents aren't in medical research, I have to rely on what professionals tell me would be best. I think that people are upset by the suggestion that all boys and girls should be vaccinated because of HPV's association with somewhat high risk sexual activity. On the one hand, parents want to protect their children from disease, but on the other hand, they want to think that their children aren't engaging in sexual activity. Not that I can blame them. I'm sure that if this is an issue when I have children, then I would have the same concerns. Everyone wants to think the best of their children, but the fact is that the rates of premarital sexual activity is on the rise. I think it's better to be safe than sorry. At least if they have the vaccine as a child, the parent won't have the fear of HPV infection in the future. I would think that it would be much easier for parents to deal with the fact that their child is engaging in sexual activity than to see them live their lives with an STD. I think it's ignorant of us as a society to try and ignore the issue rather than protect our children from disease.
Very interesting article I must say. I have done quite a bit of research on HPV, but only along the lines of cervical cancer. I was very surprised that HPV can also cause penile cancer, anal cancer, and oral cancer. My question is why has the cases of HPV gone up in men but down in women. I thought it was very common in women. They say it has gone up in men do to oral sex. Are they saying men are more active in the oral sex area than women? Yeah right. That could be a whole new blog. Also why is it that after the drug was produced and started being administered in girls, they thought it should be given to boys as well? Wouldn't they study all the cancers HPV can cause? A more effective way to prevent cancer resulting from HPV is to administer prior to infection. But how do you know you are at risk? Cancer can be genetic, but not always. In regards to HPV leading to cervical cancer, it can only help try to prevent it. There are hundreds if not thousands of strains of cervical cancer. Gardasil(vaccination for HPV) only protects against 3-6 strains...so is it effective? Does it work?
I think people are disapproving of this because it is a new thing. Giving your child a shot for something they may not be exposed to seems silly to some. A lot of parents are naive about their child's sexual adventures or may not assume once their child is of age that they will engage in sexual relations. When it comes to the topic of sex and children, it is like mixing oil and water...just doesn't go together.
I agree that it is very important to vaccinate both girls and boys for HPV. As someone who has a history of cervical cancer in her family, I think that whatever we can do to eliminate this disease is imperative, even if that means vaccinating boys so they cannot spread it to women. I'm sure that parents of boys who are hesitant to give them the vaccination must learn to understand that its irresponsible to allow your children to be uneducated on the matter. Its like not teaching your children about birth control, condom use, other STD's, etc. And if a parent cannot see past saving the health of girls their sons may be with, then they can surely see how important it is to step out of their comfort level in regards to sex, and see that their son's health is at risk too. I know that I would do anything to lower my child's chance for cervical cancer, or any other cancers a boy may get.
I think that boys should also be vaccinated. This virus doesn't just affect females it also affects males so why not treat them also. Why are we just protecting females? This makes no sense. Not only would I be looking for a vaccine for males also I would be looking to make a vaccine that treats kids at a younger age than what the allows. More and more kids are becoming sexually active at such a young age these days. Also, for those who have been molested and raped at a young age are at a disadvantage also. Unfortunately these are other issues that need to be accounted for when making these kinds of vaccines.
I feel that it still is relatively too early to initiate vaccines for everyone. The FDA in my opinion approves medication and vaccines too soon and with too little research. If a person wishes to obtain the vaccine; I believe they should be allowed due to the vaccine being tested, but to allow for such a vaccine to be available may contribute toward additional ignorance when considering how one may have a false sense of security because they are vaccinated.
It is important that such a vaccine is not available so readily or easily. I don't believe there is enough information regarding the HPV virus as I must be honest I had never heard of it when considering it for males.
I think that it important to get both girls and boys vaccinated for HPV. This is something serious that can cause cancer and if we can prevent that I don't understand why people are upset.I am glad that their is more information on HPV so people can detect it disease before someone dies. I am a parent and I would want my child to be vaccinated and more parents should feel that way. It could save a life and that should be the main focus.
I agree with jessica's comment that boys should be vaccinated to because they can get the disease just the same as girls.Young boys and girls are becoming more sexual active at a younger age so parents and society as a whole should want are children to be protected. We can teach all the sex education we want but the reality is that young kids are having sex. We can tell them not to and hope they listen but that's not always the case. This is a major health risks and we need to address it.
For a while I was dating a medical student. She was also working on a Master's degree in Public Health. One of her major reasons for going into medicine was because of Women's Health issues. Because of this I was exposed to a lot of topics related to the politics of health coverage concerning women.
The HPV vaccine was brought up and discussed between us. It was mostly in concern of her sisters who would likely not recieve the vaccine because of what I will say is religious influence. This saddened both of us to say the least.
As far as I knew this was only a concern for women because only women have cervix's. At the time and to this day I feel strongly about protecting the future health of women. As such I am an advocate for the vaccine. I feel that the benefits outway the costs in this case.
This doesn't answer the question about whether males, specifically young males should be vaccinated. I certainly do.
I am curious as to why this information concerning males has not received much attention. I understand why attention has been given to the concerns of women and the controversy surrounding the vaccine. What is strange is that it has not been given to men as well. I don't think that there is any one person or entity to blame other than our entire healthcare system.
To go along with T. Row I think why they have forcused on women was because they were first sought out for getting cervical cancer. Now it is showing that men are starting to get HPV, I think that there should be a vaccination made out there to prevent cancers and other diseases. I have heard some of my friends in the past say that they were not getting the shot because their parent(s) did not think that they were sexually active, however from what I understand (and could be very much wrong)you can still get cancer if you are not sexually active. So in my mind I think that I would give up the innocent gig and get the vaccine. Just like Row said that his ex-girlfriends sisters would probably not get the shot because of religious issues. In my opinion if I could protect my little girl from getting HPV I would do so. sidenote- there are some religions that refuse blood transfusions. That would be hard for me to live with knowing that a loved one could die, and it could have been prevented by receiving blood. It kind of ties in together. I think both men and women should get the HPV vaccine to protect themselves as well as others!
Lori Ann Cammllarie
Human Sexuality-Blog #1
Jan 22, 2009
Should Boys Be Vaccinated Against HPV Infection?
Anytime we discuss human sexuality or anything relative to the subject, both genders should be involved. Many times the responsibility has been thrusted upon the female gender, when it should be shared by both males and females. Since HPV is spread by males and males can be carriers of this infection, it would seem like common sense to make a vaccine for them as well. Everyone should equally take responsibility to find the treatments, cures and prevention measures for these things that affect both genders, which affect all people. When you are sexually active, you take a risk of acquiring a sexual infection, disease or virus; therefore, you should take responsibility to protect yourself and your partner.
I didn't know much about HPV until a few years ago. When I heard about it, I was always told that men are just carriers who don't suffer any health risks from having it, but that it can cause women to have cervical cancer as well as some other things. Now that we know that it causes serious health risks for both men and women, it's important for us to do whatever we can to keep it from spreading. Since there's now a vaccine, I think it's important to encourage both boys and girls to get the vaccine by informing them on what it is, what the consequences are, and making the vaccine free and convenient to everyone.
I definitely think it's more important to protect individuals from diseases that cause cancer, no matter its controversial aspects. If the vaccine will prevent HPV from occurring in both sexes, then it is only logical for both to get the vaccine. It's a form of preventative care, enabling the individual immunity from future HPV-related complications (as well as future expense in terms of medical bills). While I say this, however, I understand the possible repercussions and controversies that come along with this viewpoint. By getting the vaccine, some might believe the vaccine gives them permission to participate in sexual relations. Furthermore, some might believe it allows the individual to practice dangerous sexual relations, such as having unprotected sex. It might give the individual a false sense of security, that the vaccine gives them the permission to have sex in any form, no matter if it is intercourse, oral, etc. Ideally, the individual getting vaccinated would be administered some form of education about the vaccine, perhaps in the form of a brochure or similar pamphlets (this may already occur; I'm not sure).
From what I have heard, the big stink people are making about girls getting the HPV vaccination is that we, as a society, would be encouraging sexual interaction and exposure at a much younger age. This does not make sense to me but that is what I understand the argument to be about, which is a similar argument people have proposed about the distribution of condoms to promote safe sex. Our society uses sex to sell, we have many erotica medias with which to indulge our fantasies, and we hold in special regard those who embody the very sexuality of men and women. We are even starting to incorporate more “homosexual friendly” cultural devices; a recent example would be the movie “Milk” which was nominated for several Academy Awards.
However, when it comes to talking about our children being sexually active, especially in a form which is not entirely mainstream yet (i.e. homosexuality, bisexuality), we, as a society, get a little unsettled. Perhaps this viewpoint is outdated, which is entirely possible because I spent most of my life in the Midwest and was been raised in the Lutheran tradition. Be that as it may, people who I have talked to about this topic have said that they feel that they are being scared or bullied into getting the shot. A female acquaintance, in her late twenties, was asked at her last yearly gynecological check-up whether she wanted to be scheduled for the HPV vaccination. She declined because she was under the impression that, like a flu shot, you are just as likely or more to contract the virus from the shot as you would from not being protected. Keep in mind that she has been in a mutually monogamous relationship for more than ten years. That being said, she did not get the shot because she feared that if people found out that she got the shot, they would think ill of her, to the point of accusing her of infidelity. This is obviously an extreme case, but there are still people, many within the Catholic religion, who think contraceptives should only be used if you are having pre-marital or extramarital affairs.
Personally I would hope that if I had a son or daughter, that I would get them vaccinated, because I would love and care for my children and want them to be protected. I would not want them to be afraid of sexual intercourse, whichever school of sexuality they subscribe to, and if them getting this vaccination would help that, then I am all for it. In the same respect, I would not force my child to receive the treatment and would only encourage it once I had a better understanding of possible side effects.
The current findings about HPV virus being linked to oral cancer really intrigues me. I think the questions Dr. Hill posted at the end of this blog entry are very pertinent. I t think that the HPV vaccine is surrounded by so much controversy largely because it has to do with sex in general. Also, the vaccination is encouraged for children (a time assumed to be before the person has engaged in sexual behaviors), which makes it controversial. Taking your twelve-year-old daughter into the doctor for an HPV vaccination can mean that you're going to have to explain to her what she's getting vaccinated for. We're so afraid of "the talk" here in the U.S., but especially here in the Midwest.
I think that people who believe that only sexual activities that are focused on procreation and who believe that oral sex is wrong will definitely take advantage of this research if they can. I can hear it now: "Oral sex causes cancer, therefore it must be evil." While I don't think there is anything wrong with oral sex, I do think that these current findings have something to say for how well we practice safe sex.
My personal view on the issue is that it is extremely important to create a 'safe' vaccination against the HPV virus for both girls and boys. Since both sexes can be and are affected by the HPV virus, measures should be taken to help protect both males and females. I think that the current HPV vaccination has received such controversy for two main reasons. The first reason is it is a new vaccine and people are typically apprehensive of new vaccines. This is because they are unsure of all of the side effects. Secondly, I think that since the vaccine is targeting young girls, parents feel their daughters are too young to even start thinking about sex. Although the concerns are legitimate, the bigger issue is what is best for your child's health. We all want to protect our children; that is without question. Each parent will have to make that decision on what they feel is best for their child; however, it is important to remember we are talking about cancer here. Cancer can be extremely painful (emotionally and physically). There are also many health concerns and risks after cancer has gone into remission. In my opinion, I would feel it important to protect my child against cancer. I would want to have both my son and daughter vaccinated against the HPV virus, as long as I felt the vaccine was 'safe.' With regards to teaching them about sex at a young age, I think the vaccine would need to be explained to them and try to help them understand why they are being vaccinated. There is no shame in knowledge.
I have to agree with many of the other replies regarding this vaccination of the HPV virus. I do not see any discrepancy’s in why boys should not be vaccinated like girls. If the vaccine doesn’t have any potential health risks involved, and the findings support that the vaccine helps prevent HPV then what difference does it make? I agree with the author that males should be vaccinated along with females. It is mandatory for other vaccines to be given to children, why not administer another one that could prevent potentially life threatening conditions later on in life. I do not understand what all the uproar is about regarding this matter. If suddenly there was a vaccine that was developed to prevent HIV infections, I think that society wouldn’t have such a negative view against it.
I think that if it helps to prevent cancer in girls and boys without major side effects then it should be used. I think that many people see the vaccine condones sexual intercourse in some way, but the drug only prevents some types of cancer and does not prevent sexually transmitted infections. Parents need to talk to there kids about the vaccine and the advantages and disadvantages of having it. I think many parents would want to prevent their children to get parents and they can do it with this vaccine. But I do not think that the government should mandate it and that parents and their children should decide when they receive it.
I believe both boys and girls should be vaccinated against HPV for three reasons. First, there is the issue of men being able to contract HPV from a partner. This HPV could lead to the types of cancer mentioned on the original blog post, such as penile, anal, or oral, or genital warts. In addition, this cancer could come from a male or female sexual partner. If only women are vaccinated, men who engage in sex with other men are not being protected. Therefore, only vaccinating women in no way protects all men. It only protects men who have sex with women.
Second, it is important to vaccinate men so that they will not spread HPV to another individual. For example, a man from the United States could contract HPV. Then, while traveling abroad, he could spread it to an unvaccinated individual. Again, just as the previous paragraph mentioned, vaccinating only women will not prevent the spread of HPV.
Third, I believe that it is important for our society to do everything possible to prevent the spread of all Sexually Transmitted Diseases, including HPV. If a vaccination exists and is safe, I see no reason why it should not be administered to the public. The Hepatitis B vaccine is commonly given to school-aged children with little backlash from the community. The only difference I see between the two situations is the fact that HPV is more commonly thought to be sexually transmitted, while Hepatitis B is thought to come from a variety of sources. Thus, it seems that sexually transmitted diseases, and vaccines for the STDs, are being marginalized.
I would imagine that the upheaval regarding the vaccine is related to the marginalization of sexually transmitted diseases. Some people are probably afraid that the vaccine will decrease the risk of sexual behavior and cause society to lose some of its morals. For example, the predicted increased sexual behavior associated with this vaccine may lead to adultery and lack of abstinence. I would counter this argument with two of my own.
First, there is still a great deal of risk associated with sexual behavior. I would imagine that HPV is not one of the first issues on a person’s mind regarding sexual behavior. These spots are most likely reserved for AIDS and pregnancy.
Second, if a society has a vaccine that it knows will prevent the loss of life and disease, yet withholds it from the public, is said society really moral? I would say that it is not. To me, preventing disease and death trumps abstinence and fidelity.
Wow, this article blew my mind. America and the rest of the world have a big rising issue on there hands. I had no idea how bad HPV had gotten. I also did not know HPV was around in the 70's. I reallyu though this was a newer STD issue. I think the vaccination is a great finding, anything to help prevent a disease. I had heard somewhere that teens are having throat problems caused from HPV and oral sex. I did not know HPV was a cause of oral cancer, that has never even come to my mind. I really think if this vaccination could possible help both biological sexes then why not try it. I do not believe it should become a mandated law that at a certain age your child must have this even though when I am fifty according to this article 80% of women will have HPV. I think more research and continual research needs to been done with the vaccination and HPV. This vaccination does not prevent all forms of HPV either. I also think maybe sometype of screening needs to be done. According to my doctor a person could carry the HPV virus for ten years before showing any signs of symptoms. I have also heard that men are carriers and do not show signs. All of these are reasons for why I feel continual research is important. I do believe this vaccination is beneficial and believed in it enough to have the vaccination myself several years ago.
I was unaware of the prospect of using the vaccine on men; I sat through a presentation on the vaccine and was advised to get it, but I never did. I think that the vaccine should be available to anyone who wants it. For me it is a matter of personal preference. I think that the research is out there and it is up to individuals whether or not they want to get the vaccine. I do not think it is fair to say that girls can get it and guys cannot, I mean the risks seem significant for both sexes.
I think people are upset because the long term risks are unknown and I think the FDA approval was somewhat sceptical. In the presentation I went to they said that the vaccine was very specific and does not prevent for all kinds of cervical cancer and that was something I did not know. It just seems to me that people are misinformed. I mean sometimes mistakes are made within the medical community with regard to prescribing treatments; like the thalidomide crisis or even the Tuskegee syphilis study. I know we have came leaps and bounds in ethical standards but I think in our health conscious society people are always going to question under-researched drugs.
I think it is obviously more important to protect people than avoid the issue because it discusses sexual behavior. To be honest I was unaware that the issue was with the vaccines relation to sexual behavior. I think it is very unfortunate if the drugs discussion and distribution is halted because people are uncomfortable with discussing the topic. For me the issue with the vaccine is just like the issue with sex education… out of sight, out of mind is 100% ineffective, if people are engaging in risky behaviors then they should have a source of information to draw from if they need help, support, or advice. I am aware of the risks of the cancer, the risks of the vaccine and the risks of not getting the vaccine and I have chosen not to get it. I feel by being educated about the subject matter I put myself in the best position to make the best decision for me; I don’t think everyone should have to get it regardless of their sex but I just think people should have the option to get information about it so they can choose whether or not they want it.
When it comes to vaccinating both boys and girls for the Human Papillomavirus (HPV) infection, I believe it is a great idea and I am all for it. It has become apparent through research that HPV is a leading cause of cancer of the tonsils, lower tongue, and upper throat, along with the previously known cervical cancer. I think it is insane for young boys and girls not to have the vaccination because some people believe it promotes sexual behavior in adolescents. This idiotic belief probably stems from religious groups who are opposed to pre-marital sex and do not want their children to feel like they are influenced to have sex because they have been vaccinated to have safer sex. Sure, we definitely should not administer the vaccination because the increasing prevalence of HPV-related oral cancer in men could be influenced by the increasing frequency of oral-genital sex, so it makes sense not to make the vaccination readily available in an effort to help prevent the cancer… Wait, no it doesn’t. If the vaccination has the ability to help decrease oral-cancer, we should be giving it to all boys and girls from a young age. As research has shown, the vaccine is more effective when it is administered prior to the HPV infection, which is in my opinion the perfect rationale for vaccinating youths before they engage in sexual behaviors. The simple vaccination of youths does not mean they will go out and start having sex right away. We cannot allow the “religious right” to once again get in the way of protecting future generations from a terrible disease. This is not a matter of religion or faith; it is a matter of scientific study in which researchers have found a link between the HPV infection and different types of cancers. This scientific discovery should be used in our current generation to help prevent these different types of cancers. The vaccination should not be subjected to religious fervor of parents who are not willing to talk to their children in an honest way about sexuality. With more research, hopefully those who oppose the distribution of this vaccination will come to their senses and see the positives of administering the HPV vaccine to all youths.
I suppose one should consider what is considered "an early age" before administering the vaccination. Some populations may be able to put off the vaccination until more a more mature age, but it is not entirely unheard of for males and females to have sex at the very onset of puberty. The vaccination should wait until the child fully understands why they need to get it, but along with the vaccination, parents must also emphasize the importance of sex education. The vaccination for both boys and girls is a great idea, but it should be considered more of a failsafe than a first line of defense. Proper use of a condom should come first in the sex education, and then the vaccination should be administered as a supplement. Religious concerns about how administering this vaccine will affect the one's view of sex should take a backseat to the role of parenting. Granted, the vaccine will prevent a sexually transmitted disease, but the parent should be responsible for telling the child that they shouldn't engage in behavior that would involve that risk in the first place. Abstinence education may fall in line with their morality, but the parents should also realize that they cannot exert complete control over their child. They may still make a mistake with sex, or fall prey to "the heat of the moment". Pure abstinence training should therefore be supplemented with contraceptive education.
I believe that people are upset about vaccinating young people for a sexually transmitted disease. If the individual is very concervative the arguement can be made that if abstience is practiced there is no risk of contracting a sexually transmitted disease. The Hepatitis B vaccine is also a sexually transmitted disease that infants are routinely vaccinated for, sometimes prior to leaving the hospital. Parents should be careful to align their beliefs apropriately, that is, to respond to the vaccine for religious convictions and not the marketing of the vaccine. I believe that it is better to protect our young people from their mistakes. We not have the power to prevent cancer and other HPV diseases for both men and women. We should be vaccinating both boys and girls not just stop the spread of HPV to women but to protect men from the various cancers as discussed in the article. The only way to stop a disease through vaccinations is to irradiacate the hosts and potential hosts from the HPV virus. This can only be accomplished through vaccinating both sexes. I also believe that more education is in order for parents. I am the mother of 4 boys and this is the first article that I have seen discussing the benifits of vaccinating boys for their health not just to halt the spread of HPV to their potentional parteners. If more people knew the risks of cancer to boys more boys would be getting the vaccine.
I did not realize before reading this that HPV can affect men also and the extent to which they are affected. What an eye opener! I think it’s important for people to be more informed of the realities of HPV and for the vaccine to be improved. Foremost, though, is society’s need to not expose our children to all things sexual, making our society perhaps the most hypocritical on the face of the planet! One of the earlier posts said it great so I’ll just paraphrase, sex sells, our media is covered with images and portrayals of sexual beings and your sexual identity, sex is everywhere even if it’s not a Discovery Channel-type presentation. But when parents hear “sex” they instantly clam up. I have to be honest, my daughter was 4 and one day we were driving and all of the sudden I hear, “Mommy, when was the first time you and Daddy had sex?” I just about drove off the side of the road!!! Thankfully, for her age, she just thought sex was kissing which is all she needs to know at 4. But I know I’m not in the clear yet. I think it’s a difficult thing for people to say “when I have kids I’ll be open about sex” because it’s just not that cut and dry. No matter how liberal someone is, there is such a thing as age appropriateness. This idea of appropriateness is where the disconnect comes to play in our society. Everyone’s upbringing, education, and religious/spiritual beliefs effect what is appropriate at different times related to sexual behavior, whether it is related to age or relationship status. If parents can accept that educating your children is not condoning behavior outside of the bounds they believe to be true, then the vaccines may get more support. It could be like a family that lives on a lake. Maybe they believe that the water should be just looked at and used for a food source, not for swimming and playing. But because you want your children to only be on top of the water in a boat, do you not teach them how to swim or to not wear a life-jacket? Is there no possibility of the boat tipping over – what happens then? Just because you don’t want them to do something certainly doesn’t mean they won’t.
Additionally, the vaccines themselves need to be improved. Unless I missed it in these posts no one has spoken about the vaccine’s effectiveness. We don’t have any long term data on the vaccine but we do know now that it does not prevent all types of HPV. Also, most health insurance coverage does not cover the vaccine and America has so many uninsured people just compounding the problem even more! So even if the vaccine were available for girls and boys, it won’t protect against all types of HPV, nor will the majority of people have access to or choose to get it. This presents even more problems with “super bugs” where diseases can adapt and become resistant to treatments and vaccines. (This is why you have to take all of an antibiotic prescription until it’s gone, not just until you feel better.) So why it makes good sense to make the vaccine available to boys and girls because of the health risks presented to both genders from HPV, it makes even more sense to improve the vaccine and its availability to have the greatest impact.
I read this blog entry and I guess I don’t see why there should be any controversy. There is obviously evidence to support the fact that HPV is affecting boys and men in increasing numbers. If there is a solution in existence to solve this problem, why would people not want boys to have a chance at preventing a life threatening illness? Girls have been the focus of the HPV vaccine, but keeping it from boys seems like discrimination to me. It would be like if someone found a cure for breast cancer but only made it available to women. If we started to vaccinate both boys and girls, this will prevent the overall spread of HPV once they become sexually active because they aren’t passing it to each other. Why are people so afraid of this topic? Perhaps they don’t want to introduce their kids to sexual ideas at a young age, but maybe they should think about the effect it will have on their child and their family if the disease is contracted and they had the chance to prevent it. In my mind, it’s a no-brainer.
The fact that we are even debating whether or not our children should be vaccinated against cancer shocks me. I understand where those who argue against the vaccination base their argument—on fundamental religious principles—but I believe that they have their sites targeted on the wrong age group. In our culture sex sells, and it often is, which pushes teens towards being sexually active. Instead of protecting our kids from cancer by vaccinating them, those who oppose it simply believe that it is God’s will for the child to be stricken with cancer. I would argue that it was not God’s will, but instead it was willed by a culture driven by displays of sexuality. Therefore those who are against the vaccination should attack the source of the problem not the victim.
This is a very touchy issue, as many special interest groups are involved. According to some, vaccinating our children against a sexually transmitted virus may somehow encourage them to engage in sexual behavior, even at an early age. However, I think it is a more practical approach to protect our kids against something that could—potentially—kill them in adulthood.
Why would we not vaccinate our girls against something that most carriers don’t even know they have? From my mother’s experience, HPV does not simply manifest itself in the form of cervical papillomas. My mom recently had a cancerous papilloma removed from one of her tonsils. It’s not just oral cancer and other forms of illness that we need to be concerned about in specifically women or specifically men: we need to be more aware across the board. Surprisingly, not all insurance companies will cover HPV vaccinations. I recently tried to receive my own HPV vaccination, and my insurance would not cover any of the shots (Gardasil, the most common and most effective vaccine, is a series of three shots over eight months). All told, I will be paying over $400 for a protection that I should have received as a child. Even when my OB-GYN personally called my insurance company and told them that cervical cancer and papillomas run in my family, my claims were denied.
Personally, I intend to have all of my children vaccinated, regardless of their sex. Ideally, my kids will get these vaccinations with other necessary shots. Hopefully in ten or fifteen years, these preventative measures will be as routine as the MMR vaccine or tetanus boosters.
I think that this is a great opportunity for parent's to help their children avoid future health risks. If there are no substantial health risks in giving your son the vaccination then I think a parent would be crazy not to. The problem with our society is that parents don't want to admit that their children are going to be sexually active. They are afraid to think that their little angel is going to possibly grow up to have raunchy unprotected sex. Gasp. We as a society need to be realistic. Parents especially need to be realistic. Vaccinate your children now to protect them in the future. As a parent you can't stop your children from making bad decisions but you can certainly help protect their future and their life by getting them vaccinated.
This article noted that there has been some controversy on whether or not young girls should be vaccinated at a young age against HPV. I think the hesitation lies in the fact people do not want to think that children will grow up to be sexual beings. It is inevitable that everyone will experiment sexually at some point in their lives; therefore there should be no hesitation against the vaccination. It is not as if having your child vaccinated is going to rush her into having sex. Boys should be vaccinated as well, primarily because they do not show any signs and or symptoms; also, I am not sure how this is detected in boys, but they do not have to go yearly exams like girls do. If this vaccination is really successful in protecting against different cancers, then I do not see the justification in withholding it from boys or girls.
Recent research suggests that the Human papillomavirus (HPV) is a leading cause in oral cancer among men along with other cancers such as penile and anal. With this, it would make sense that boys should be vaccinated for the infection along with girls. I would think that parents would take every possible step to prevent their children from this infection. However, transmission of the infection is likely due to oral-genital sex. Men who may have acquired the infection have done so through this manner. I believe that many parents do not like to think of their children as possible sexual beings one day, therefore not needing protection from something their children do not engage in. When, there children are older, well into adulthood, the children themselves can become personally responsible for their well-being. I think that it is naive to think that your child will absolutely not engage in sex one day, with no contraction of the infection. According to Hill, though little research has been done on children's sexuality, one study shows that children can experience sexual attraction as early as the age of 10. In addition, over half have reported sexual exploration of other children's genitals by the age of 12. It is better to be prepared and vaccinate before sexual activity when it is most effective. It is clear to me that children, both boys and girls, should be vaccinated against a virus that could possibly lead to cancer. Vaccination does not take away the innocence of the child. Perhaps, a particular child will wait well into adulthood to engage in sexual activity. Still, why wait to see if your child is the exception and risk their future when one can knowingly prevent the cancer today.
My view about vaccinating girls and boys for HPV infection is conflicting. First, I do think it is important to vaccinate people; boys or girls, against something that we know can lead to cancer. Cancer is a huge killer in our country, so why wouldn’t people want to do everything to protect themselves against it. Especially, when there is a vaccine for this form and there aren’t for others. People choose not to smoke or be in smoky places to avoid lung cancer, so why not get vaccinated to avoid cervical, oral, anal, or penile cancer. However, the other point of view I have is that new vaccines can be scary and can have side effect people won’t know about for a few more years. I’m very hesitant to get vaccinated for something even when there is a promise of preventing cancer. I think ultimately it should be each person choice, or their parent’s choice depending on their age. I think people are upset about thinking about vaccinating their children at a young age for the same reason they have reservations about talking about sex. If you do it too soon, it may lead them to experiment earlier. These worries shouldn’t be an issue, just because people educate or protect their children from risks that occur because of sexual behavior doesn’t mean their ten year old is going to go out and have sex because they got vaccinated against HPV. They should focus more on it preventing a terrible disease rather than the sexual side of it all. So to answer the last question, it is more important to protect individuals from factors known to cause cancer than to worry about related sexual behavior issues.
If there is a vaccine available and people want to get themselves or their children vaccinated, then that is their right. However, since it is a relatively new vaccine, and since no long-term studies exist to show what side effects it may have, the idea of compulsory vaccination is premature at best, and dangerous at worst. Also, call me a cynic, but Merck and the other drug companies have boatloads of research money, as well as lots of motivation to try to link anything and everything to some scary disease that their latest greatest miracle drug can treat or prevent. If they were to throw enough money at it, they could probably come up with a study showing that people who post on this blog are more likely to contract some disease or another. Luckily for us, however, they would surely be waiting with a new wonder-drug to prevent it. Don't expect me to be first in line for it, though, as I do not care to be a human guinea pig. So, as I said before, if one wants to be vaccinated, then he or she can certainly do so. However, I can certainly understand how someone might be upset at the prospect of mandatory vaccination. Also, as mentioned by many of the previous responses, since the vaccine is said to be most effective if administered before exposure to the HPV virus (i.e. before first sexual activity), the recipients of this vaccine would be primarily children, whose parents may be reluctant or unwilling to talk about sex. They might be concerned that getting their child vaccinated could be considered tantamount to condoning sexual activity, or perhaps that their child would think that, after being vaccinated, they are immune to all possible negative consequences of sexual behavior. This goes back to the importance of comprehensive sex education, which in my opinion would serve better than would mandatory vaccination with a relatively new drug.
I think that it is very important for boys to get vaccinated with the HPV vaccination as well as girls, especially if boys are the carriers of the HPV. I personally do not understand the controversies surrounding HPV vaccinations because I see it as potentially saving your child’s or your very own life against cervical cancer, considering that it is more prevalent now, than ever. Unless completely abstinate, it ultimately should be up to the individual whether or not to get the vaccination but I think it should be a subject that is discussed between the doctor and all of their sexually active patients. I feel that this is such an important topic and doctors just "present" the material about the HPV, and I find that often times it should be DISCUSSED and CONSIDERED instead of just presented as a good idea to patients.
In general, I think that the HPV vaccination is a great idea. That being said, I do not think that there are enough studies and trials to make it mandatory for parents to vaccinate their daughters. I even thought twice about the routine vaccinations that had to be administered to my daughter in her first 2 years of life. I am glad that my daughter is still young enough that when she comes to the age where we need to think about giving this vaccination, there will be many more studies and trials that will have been done to prove its effectiveness and need.
As for young boys, I feel the same as I do for administering it to young girls. I do not think there has been enough time to be sure of the effects of this vaccination. I do not think that we as a population should stray from anything because it involves sex. I think that as parents, we tend to think a little harder about things that deal with sexual issues, such as condoms in school bathrooms. Just because it’s there, does not mean that your child will use them. I think that it is just important to educate your children about sexual issues and be very open and honest so that they feel comfortable coming to the parent instead of a friend who will lead them astray. I think that is the bigger issue here. I think that many parents, when it comes to things that deal with sex and their children, do not want to have to deal with those issues with their children because it’s embarrassing, or they think that if they talk about it that gives the child permission. I think that parents need to grow as people, as we want our children to do, and teach them how we want them to behave instead of just hoping that they take the hint. I know that my mother was not open to me at all about sex. When I hit puberty, we had a small talk that basically stated that I can become pregnant should sex happen, and that if I have questions about anything I can ask her. As a preteen, I wasn’t even thinking about sex. So, it was hard for me to talk to her about it. Despite the lack of information given to me from my parents, I have grown up a well adjusted, open minded individual. So, I think that the bigger issue here is that many parents do not want their child thinking that because they get a vaccine, it is ok to have risky behavior; so, they need to educate their children.
I'm going to be honest and say that I had never really thought about how HPV may affect boys as well as girls. I really only knew that it was the leading cause of cervical cancer in women. So to learn that it can be linked to other cancers in boys as well is very interesting and very important to my views on the HPV vaccination. When the HPV vaccination first became available, I was fairly resistant to the idea only because there were rumblings of making it mandatory that all girls get vaccinated at a certain age. I am reluctant to anything that uses the word "mandatory." I was always concerned because it was a fairly new vaccination and I had not heard about much research on side effects. So I was definitely against making something mandatory, especially if there was not sufficient research into possible side effects and risks involved. I was never against the vaccine because it dealt with sex though. Now that the vaccine has been around a little bit and I have not heard any significant issues with it, I think it is something that people definitely need to be educated about. I am all for vaccinating both girls and boys. I think that the controversy regarding the vaccine was ridiculous if it was indeed founded in the idea that because it dealt with sex, it should not be discussed etc. I absolutely think it is more important to educate young people and try to protect them against these factors than to avoid the issue because it relates to sexual behavior. Shying away from these topics and issues only creates more problems and puts more people at risk because they may be improperly educated. So I am definitely all for the vaccination of both boys and girls.
I understand that the vaccination was initially tested and subsequently produced because of its amazing effects on the Human Papillomavirus infection in young girls against cervical cancer. Yet, it seems ignorant to disregard the other possible cancers it could protect against. I don’t think that it is fair to ignore oral cancer and anal cancer just because they are more sensitive subjects to discuss. I also do not believe that finding a vaccine for an infection advocates the continuation of the activities that lead to that infection. Sexual activities will continue no matter. If there are ways to protect individuals in our society, then I think we should proceed to enact them. Condoms protect from multiple types of sexually transmitted diseases and may be deemed as supporting casual or premarital sex, but condoms protect many individuals and have greatly helped our culture. I do not think it is fair to ignore the protection the HPV infection vaccine could give to boys just because it is a sensitive subject.
For me, this one is a tough situation. My view on vaccinations is definitely a complicated one at best.
However, if we I were to pick a cut and dry opinion, I would say that it is important to try and protect women from cervical cancer. On that same note, we should try to prevent anyone we can from getting any cancer. It only makes sense that we would vaccinate males against cancer as well.
There are a couple points made in the article I found really interesting. The first is the idea that by vaccinating men against the virus will help protect women as well. The other is the idea of HPV causing more oral cancer because of an increase in oral-genital sex. This idea really makes sense to me. However, I'm not sure if it is necessarily an increase in oral-genital sex so much as in increase in overall sexual activity which spreads HPV, which is then transmitted through oral-genital sex.
I believe that Gardasil had just come out when I was a couple years older than the recommended time frame but my Doctor still recommended it. Being a little weird about vaccinations, and having a father who won’t even approach the topic of sex- together we decided for me to not get the shots. Honestly, when the time comes for me to decide for my son and daughter, it will totally depend on the statistics at that time. While everyone wants to be protected against possible cancer, it’s important to weigh all of the other factors as well.
For me, this one is a tough situation. My view on vaccinations is definitely a complicated one at best.
However, if we I were to pick a cut and dry opinion, I would say that it is important to try and protect women from cervical cancer. On that same note, we should try to prevent anyone we can from getting any cancer. It only makes sense that we would vaccinate males against cancer as well.
There are a couple points made in the article I found really interesting. The first is the idea that by vaccinating men against the virus will help protect women as well. The other is the idea of HPV causing more oral cancer because of an increase in oral-genital sex. This idea really makes sense to me. However, I'm not sure if it is necessarily an increase in oral-genital sex so much as in increase in overall sexual activity which spreads HPV, which is then transmitted through oral-genital sex.
I believe that Gardasil had just come out when I was a couple years older than the recommended time frame but my Doctor still recommended it. Being a little weird about vaccinations, and having a father who won’t even approach the topic of sex- together we decided for me to not get the shots. Honestly, when the time comes for me to decide for my son and daughter, it will totally depend on the statistics at that time. While everyone wants to be protected against possible cancer, it’s important to weigh all of the other factors as well.
Based on the evidence presented in the blog “Should Boys Be Vaccinated Against HPV Infection?” I feel that both boys and girls should be vaccinated against HPV. I was honestly kind of oblivious to the fact that HPV affects so many males. I had always associated HPV with cervical cancer in women. I was rather shocked to find that it is linked to higher instances of oral, penile, and anal cancer among men. I would believe that many people are upset about the prospect about vaccinating both boys and girls for HPV because it acknowledges the fact that sexual behavior is occurring at younger ages in uncommitted relationships. It makes sense to me that this type of thinking is met with such passionate disapproval because the United States is founded on Christian principles. By acknowledging that HPV is associated with sexual behavior these principles are being cast away.
I believe that it is far more important to protect these individuals from factors known to cause cancer, rather than simply ignore it because it is related to sexual behavior. This would be a huge mistake by the American society at large because HPV has the potential to kill both sexes in so many ways. It would seem foolish to not educate and allow both boys and girls the opportunity to be vaccinated.
I found this article to be very informative and educational. There is far more education on the HPV virus now than ever before, but it is always directed towards women. I had no idea that men have a great risk of contacting the infection as well. I thought it was particularly interesting that it is as common in men as oral cancer from alcohol and tobacco.
I think that boys should be vaccinated against the HPV infection, but I think it should be the child’s parents’ decision. The article mentions the importance of giving them the vaccine before they are sexually active as a preventive measure. I think it would be beneficial for parents to vaccinate their children, but they should also educate their children about safe sex and the sexually transmitted diseases the can be contacted.
I do not think this issue should be avoided because it is related to sexual behavior. It is a serious matter that people need to be knowledgeable about so they can help prevent it. I think people would be upset about the prospect of being required to vaccinate their children because there are risks involved. The HPV vaccine is fairly new and parents could be concerned about possible side effects. For example, recent studies have indicated vaccines have been linked to possibly causing autism in children.
I also think some parents would be hesitant to vaccinate their children because they would fear their child would think their parents are condoning sexual behavior. As long as the proper education is put forward, I think vaccinating boys for HPV will only provide benefits.
My view on any vaccination is that it is the parent’s personal decision. I think vaccines are good and I believe the risks without the vaccine, outweigh the risks of actually getting the vaccine. I hadn’t heard of vaccinating boys for the HPV virus before this article, but I think it seems like a good idea. Whatever can keep the occurrence of a disease down, or to prevent a disease from spreading is a good thing. If both boys and girls are vaccinated, it should also bring down the statistics of the worse outcomes happening as well, such as cancer. People may be upset about this prospect in general just because a lot of people don’t believe vaccines are a good idea. There are quite a few people that believe vaccines cause more harm than good and are unnecessary. People may also be upset about the prospect because they don’t want their child to believe that they are superman and start being promiscuous because they have a vaccine that prevents one kind of sexual disease. Another problem for people may be that they believe the likelihood of women suffering the long term risks are greater than men because the studies are so new of men and their long term risks. So, there is less information available and it’s still really new to a lot of people. Like I said, I’ve honestly never heard of men being vaccinated for the HPV virus. I think it is more important to protect individuals from factors known to cause cancer. Cancer is very serious and no one should overlook preventing it just to avoid a situation linked with sexual behavior. Sexual behavior is a lot easier to talk about and get over than finding out that because it was avoided, cancer has occurred.
I am very surprised to learn that the HPV vaccination is now being directed towards males, as well as females. I didn’t even know that males could get HPV. It could just be lack of understanding, but I thought HPV was solely cervical cancer. First of all, I think that it is very important to inform males about HPV and the vaccination. They should be informed with television ads and magazine articles, just like those directed towards young women.
Secondly, as was stated in some of the previous comments on the blog, the vaccination should not be looked at in a negative light. When there is something out there that can prevent cancer or infections, what person wouldn’t want to take that option? I think that parents are afraid to get their child vaccinated, because they would have to take a step back into reality and realize that their child is or will be having sex. I also think that parents may be concerned about the side effects. I have heard of girls passing out after getting the vaccination, but that seems a lot better compared to having cancer. People just need to be fully informed of the side effects and benefits and then it will be up to each parent on whether or not they want to vaccinate their child.
I definitely think that it is an issue that should be brought up and discussed. Parents may not want to even think about their kids having sex, but it’s necessary to know all of the risk factors that coming along with that. Kids don’t have to be sexual active to get the vaccination, so it’s a precaution to take, because whether or not parents like it, kids will have sex. There are people out there who do want to protect their kids with the vaccination, so I think that it would be unfair to them for the issue to be disregarded all together. All in all, it is up to parents what they do with the information that they are given.
I think that it is very important that both boys and girls are given this new vaccine. However I also believe that it should be the choice of the individual and not the decision of parents or lawmakers. The reasoning behind the giving of the vaccine is simple to prevent HPV. HPV is a very real and dangerous issue in society today and if there is a way to prevent the virus I believe that people should have the option. I also think that it is crucial for boys to get the vaccine because, even though the effects of the vaccine may not appear to be prevalent, they can spread the virus to girls. The reasons that people get upset about the vaccine are the same reasons people get about sex ed. They believe that if their child is kept in the dark about sexual matters then they will be less likely to engage in sexual activity. Also they may believe that if their child gets the vaccine they will be more likely to partake in sex because the risks are decreased. These reasons may be valid for a select few individuals, but most people, especially adolescents, are going to have sex anyway and therefore should be protected. However the vaccine should only be given with the consent of the individual and after they are informed about all the risks associated with HPV and unprotected sex.
The HPV vaccination is something I know something about. I was working at an OB/GYN office when this all came out. The doctors in this practice completely supported this vaccine and recommended it to all the teenage girls that came in. It is unfortunate that people can take a cancer preventative and turn it sexual. Many parents feel that if they agree to this vaccine, they are giving their daughters permission to have sex but in reality this could save them from many painful procedures in the future.
Boys also should be vaccinated for HPV. Both men and women have sex, while should the woman be the only one protected? Men do not always have sex with women, this vaccine might also help men in homosexual relationships. Anyone can get cancer and people should be grateful that they are making strides in the prevention of this terrible disease and turn it around to be sexual.
All boys, as well as all girls, should be vaccinated against HPV. Vaccination should be early – perhaps as an add-on to the early childhood vaccine schedule. Although most strains of HPV are not dangerous, they are all spread by skin-to-skin contact.
I think the resistance to the HPV vaccine is because HPV has been dubbed a sexually transmitted disease and some parents are concerned that getting a child vaccinated for a “sexually transmitted disease” will make their child more likely to engage in sexual activity. HPV causes warts – all kinds of warts. I know an 11 year old with warts on her feet. She has HPV. She has a “sexually transmitted disease” that she got from running around with no shoes on. Granted, this isn’t the same strain, but it is the same virus, spread the same way but targeting different skin. The moniker is not entirely deserved and has made people undeservedly skeptical f the vaccine.
Regardless of how it is transmitted, we have the ability to prevent infection with a virus that is capable of causing cancer. How can we not, in good conscience, utilize this ability?
I agree with both Jessica and Tweety boys and girls should both be vaccinated. I also agree with comments left by other students stating that if there is a way to prevent cancer that we should take that and give it to everyone we can. Preventing cancer is preventing cancer and cancer of the mouth, penis or anus. I found it so hard to believe that because of the increase in oral-genital sex the rates of HPV causing cancer of the mouth was as common as oral cancer caused by alcohol and tobacco. By giving everyone this vaccine at a young age hopefully it will become like MMR, Hepatitis, and other routine shots that prevent many things. People are upset by this because it could possibly turn in to just another mandatory vaccine that could someday have side effects. Or we might find out that it is in turn bad for us. I think is doesn’t matter if there are upset people, this vaccine is a life saving vaccine, everyone should get it.
The HPV shot does not protect against all strands of the HPV virus. However, protection from any amount of strands will decrease ones chance of acquiring cancer. If the vaccination will work in boys as well or better than with girls then yes everyone should be vaccinated. I think it is every parent’s job to protect their child, every parent will not know when their child is beginning to be sexually active. If they vaccinated their child early in their childhood then they will be protecting them from potential cancers later on. Children are given many vaccinations that are not explained to them what they are being protected from. Why would this vaccination be any different? A parent can choose not to tell their child that the vaccination is for sexual transmitted disease protection. If they are unaware of that then they will not have sex before they would have without the vaccination.
Vaccinating girls and boys alike against HPV infection is a step in the right direction for their health. People get all worked up over the idea of vaccinating young folks against sexually transmitted diseases because they perceive it as giving them a license to engage in premarital sex. Hepatitis, some forms of which can be sexually transmitted, is currently a disease that young people are vaccinated against. So, it is hard for me to understand why some people are so adamantly against HPV inocculation. Protecting people from cancer is more important than what may be seen as moral relaxation. The effects of HPV are very real, as is obvious by the increase of incidence and the discoveries of links to multiple types of cancer. In the interest of the health of the masses, it is time for those who oppose HPV vaccination to bite their moral bullet and protect young people through vaccination.
Reading this blog entry makes me wonder so many things. First of all, if HPV have the potential to cause anal, oral, and penile cancer in men, why has it only been marketed to females under the assumption that the only cancer it causes is cervical? I try to stay up to date on women’s health issues and I have even recently given a presentation regarding Planned Parenthood and their services, including the HPV vaccine, to a women’s studies class. Even the pamphlets given to me on the HPV virus by Planned Parenthood did not include information on the problems HPV cause for men, other than the general fact that it may cause genital warts in both sexes. It is a vaccine marketed specifically for females. In fact, I did not even know that the vaccine was now approved for use for men.
Second, this story makes me wonder why it is almost always the responsibility of women to protect themselves from STI’s and pregnancy. I am speaking in general terms and I know this is not always the case but use of contraception is more frequently initiated by women than men and sexual behavior in general is regulated by (and for) women more often than men. Parent’s keep an eye on their daughter’s sexuality while promoting their sons, and girls that do make the decision to become sexually active (and their parents are aware of it) are put on birth control pills while boys are not monitored as strictly.
The fact is that HPV does not just spontaneously occur in women, it is transmitted through sexual activity. To vaccinate only one half of the population is a losing battle. Both sexes will continue to get infected as partners inevitably change. If we vaccinated both sexes there would be much less inter-transmission and over time, like smallpox, it could be eliminated. Even if this virus did not cause men any disease whatsoever, the only responsible action would still be to vaccine men for women’s sake.
Boys should be vaccinated just as much as girls should to prevent contracting HPV. It seems like it would be wiser to vaccinate where the virus is able to spread more. Since men tend to be more sexually active and have more sexual partners. If they were vaccinated as well then both sexes would be a lot safer. I think there are some people that do not agree with having vaccines for sexually-transmitted diseases because they view it as a punishment for those who do risky sexual behaviors. However, I don't think that is right to say considering that a person you are about to engage in sex might not know and doesn't disclose that they have HPV. Even though condom protection is available, it isn't 100% effective from transferring of STDs. If we vaccinated everyone for HPV, we could be double sure that we were safe from the infection.
I believe that both boys and girls should be vaccinated against HPV infection. I know that the vaccination currently is for females between the ages of 9 to 26. The first vaccine to come out was called GARDASIL. I went ahead and researched the GARDASIL website and it states that “In boys and young men ages 9 to 26, GARDASIL helps protect against 90% of genital warts cases” (www.gardasil.com). I do not know if this is men that have actually received the injections themselves, or if it was their partners that received it. I believe that other companies are now trying to come up with similar vaccinations that work in the same way. I think that once studies have been done on males, and have been proven to be effective, then we should also have males vaccinated as well.
I think that some people have problems with their children getting vaccinated because they believe it will cause them to be more promiscuous in the future. In some of the debates I have heard, parents believe that if children get the vaccination they are giving them permission to have sex at a young age. Also, some parents do not think that their children are old enough to have this type of discussion with them. What parents need to realize is this only protects against a few types of strains of HPV. They still need to be able to talk to their children about other STD’s and other types of HPV. Allowing one vaccination does not completely protect their children against all STD’s and I do not think would lead to more promiscuous sexual activity.
I think that these types of opinions are being naïve to the larger issue, which is preventing cervical cancer. Regardless of what parents want, their children are eventually going to have sex. I think that it is being mature and responsible to recognize this and to help protect their children against this disease. If we had a vaccination to prevent all types of cancer, wouldn’t they want their children to receive that as well? Why does it have to be such a huge debate because it is protecting against a type of cancer that can be obtained sexually?
I think this post was very interesting, I had no idea that HPV was something that affected males as well as females. I think that males should have the option of getting an HPV vaccination, but it should not be required yet. After a male reaches the age of 18, they should be out of their parents control for such a vaccination. I also think there should be an amendment that with doctor-patient confidentiality, young men who wish to be involved in sexual intercourse and request the vaccination should be allowed to receive it without permission from their parents, because in the long run it will keep them more safe.
It was a controversial issue with females to start, but I think over time, the facts and statistics proving that it is more beneficial to vaccinate the young males early will prevail over the gender issues. There have been many controversial vaccinations that have now become the norm for young children. For example, I’m sure that when the chicken pox vaccine was developed, people probably didn’t think it would work or that it might harm children. Now, it is one of the first shots a child receives. I think in the end, it is all about keeping everyone in the world as healthy and cancer free as we can; sex should not play a factor. The main factor in whether a person receives a vaccination is if it is going to cause any kind of medical issues.
Jessica Sordelet
Blog Entry # 1
HPV is a very common virus that many do not know about. This virus has been around for many years, and yet I just learned about the virus a year ago in one of my classes. Prior to my class I had no knowledge of its existence. Although, one in four girls are infected with HPV many do not have any knowledge about this virus at all. In addition, many women are not tested for HPV during their annuals, and they only learn that they have HPV after they are diagnosed with cervical cancer. HPV is not discussed because most find the topic of sex awkward. However, HPV is a potentially deadly virus that could be prevented if people would just discuss the risks of HPV, and get the vaccination. Despite the cost of the vaccination, I believe that both boys and girls should be vaccinated at a young age. The vaccination could potentially save lives. Parents make sure that their children have every other shot to help prevent illnesses, so why not the HPV vaccination? It could save their child’s life, and what parent wouldn’t want to save their child’s life? Parents and society in general need to break through the sexual awkwardness barrier. Sex is a natural behavior that will happen eventually. So, why not get our children as prepared as we can, and take all the precautions necessary?
HPV is the number one STD in the US; however, I did not learn this statistic until enrolling in a Psychology of Women course last semester. HPV has been cast as such a female disease that even the vaccination is solely for women. Ridiculous. Both men and women can be carriers of the disease, both men and women can contract and spread the disease, and both sexes are vulnerable to the disease’s long term health risks (i.e. cancer). HPV does not discriminate between sexes, so why should we?
Why is it always the general population or even the government that has the say of yes or no on situations having to do with sex? With any type of medical treatment, it should be the decision of the parents and the medical provider. The medical provider has taken a Hippocratic Oath and cannot break patient confidentiality. So then if those are set into place, how does the general population have a place to have a say in what is right or wrong. If the medical provider has a problem with it they can give the patient to another practitioner.
With the issues of vaccinating boys for HPV, the same issues of moral and immoral are raised. The only reason that this is such a controversial issue is the fact that it deals with sex. Here in the United States, there are such narrow views on sex and sexuality that this vaccine is a big deal. Where as any other vaccine having to do with general health or preventing any other serious illness, there would be little to no controversy, parents would be scrambling to get their children vaccinated.
First off, I enjoyed reading this blog post because I learned a great deal about HPV that I did not know. I knew that boys could carry the HPV virus, but I was unaware that the virus could cause complications such as cancer and other things in men along with women. I was also unaware that HPV could be passes through oral-genital sex. I found it interesting that during the same time period HPV-related oral cancer increased in men, it decreased in women.
As being a girl that got the vaccination for the HPV infection, at the age of 18, I really have nothing against the idea of it. Personally, I think the vaccination is a good idea. I think it is more important to protect individuals from HPV and possibly put an end to it, than try to avoid it. I can see where people and parents would be against the vaccine. Sexual behavior has been a touchy subject throughout history. It has been something that is easier to just not discuss than go through the trouble of discussing the awkward subject. Just because you give your child a vaccine against a sexually transmitted disease does not mean you are pushing the message that it is ok to have sex now that you are protected. It is simply saying that you, as the parent, care enough about your child to make sure they are safe from certain types of cancer. I see no harm in suggesting that along with girls, boys should also be vaccinated against the HPV infection. Even if they would never come in contact with the virus in their life, the protection is good to have.
I find that vaccinations are essential for a healthy, strengthened immune system; therefore, having a vaccine for HPV infection is no different. I find that most people are against such a vaccine because it is another controversial topic related to sexual intercourse. The people have had issues with birth control for decades, but that has not stopped the pill from being available to nearly any woman who asks a doctor for it, it has not stopped condoms from being sold in stores. I personally see no problem with having a vaccination for both boys and girls for HPV infection; it is simply another protective, preventative measure.
It is certainly not acceptable to avoid this issue because it is related to sexual behavior. Birth control is related to sexual behavior such that it protects from pregnancy; however, birth control can be used for a variety of other health concerns including menstrual regulation and in treating acne. It has also been found that women who take it have reduced rates of ovarian and uterine cancers.
its my thought that 1) everyone should be offered dare i say required to take the vaccine. we have to be vaccinated for various other diseases just to get into school why not make this one of them. Std's off all kinds are just as bad as mumps, and the flu. in this day and age sexual contact is happening at a younger and younger age, with little or no regard to the over all consequences of the actions.
This leads me to my second thought, that the parents who are up in arms about the the idea of getting the shot need to re-evaluate what they are upset about. you don't hear to often about being upset about the mmr or flu shot requirements for school. what i think what they are really upset about is the fact that the government and others are showing that children are having sex at a younger age and the parents are refusing to either see it, hoping that if they don't acknowledge it its not true, or the parents don't want to acknowledge that they can't control the behavior and actions of their children. as well the education that they should be providing is lacking, due to the issue related to STD's having a lot to do with the sex talk and that still, in this enlightened age is a big taboo.
I believe there is so much controversy over the issue because parents are already unhappy with the amount of required vaccinations they must give their children. Another factor is due to the vaccination promoting sexual activity amongst adolescent. At the same time, the vaccination is a preventative action for cancers among both men and women. I do not think that it should be a mandatory vaccination but should be left at the discretion of the parents. If the parents are given a choice of whether or not they want their child to be a recipient, which leads me to believe there would be a lot less controversy then if it were mandatory. I personally would want to have my child vaccinated because it would protect her, but not all parents feel the same, and I for one do not like being told what I have to do with my child in regards to my belief system.
I personally think that vaccinating both girls and boys for HPV infection is a good think. I think that we should take advantage of the success of modern medicine in every way we can. Vaccinations like MMR are given to babies almost as they come out of the womb, because medicine has shown that by doing so it eliminates the potential for these diseases to develop. If this vaccination can possibly prevent people from developing certain types of cancers that stem from being infected with HPV, then it should be added to the list of mandatory vaccinations for all children. I think that one of the reasons that people have gotten upset about the proposal to vaccinate all young girls is because the vaccination is linked to an STD, and the subject of STD’s is linked to sexual behavior, and sexuality is still something that many people struggle talking openly about. For example, I have two nieces and my sister said that she refuses to vaccinate them because she thinks it is like openly promoting sexual behavior in girls. She said that she wants her girls to be afraid of STD’s, not feel like they have a get out of jail free card with them. I can see her point of view but I strongly disagree with her. I just think that we need to protect ourselves from things that are known to cause cancer, and if getting a vaccination is all it takes, then why not. Unfortunately, the vaccination gets a raw deal because of its link to sex, but if society focused more on its medical benefit then it might not be such a heated topic.
Nichole Baumgartner
I found this article to be insightful and interesting. I had spent quite a bit of time looking through all the other posts, trying to find one that suited me and this one jumped out the most. Not only is it the most recent, but it holds the most relevance to my life as I am a recently married woman. I have been with my husband dating wise for five years, married for six months and have to say that our relationship is predictable, although not boring. The study cites that the boredom rating in year 7 of the study directly relates to the satisfaction rating in year 16, so if you are bored with your marriage after 7 years, you more than likely will not be satisfied with your partner after 16 years.
I guess what I found to be most interesting about this article were the comments; most all of my classmates, both in this class and the classes before me, tend to state that the material presented in the study was common sense. Most people stated that anyone who has been married or divorced would realize that if you are bored in your marriage, you cannot be satisfied. If this is the case though, why is there such a high dissatisfaction rating after 16 years? If it is common knowledge that people who become bored in a relationship will not be satisfied and therefore loose the closeness and desire to be with that person, why are steps not being taken along the way to “rekindle” or at least establish a closer bond to your partner? I wish the survey would have been a little more clear on these details, maybe presenting what couples did in their marriage and daily lives that made them feel “separate”, “bored”, or like their needs were not being met so eventually the couples became dissatisfied.
In my opinion, the study was well conducted and gave some insightful data. The public was interested in the results and the results seem to be able to generalize quite well. The study helped to change the marriage counseling theme, citing not just coping with conflicts as workable areas but increasing the positive experiences within relationships to increase satisfaction overall. One thing that I did not like about the study however was that it did not cite how many of those original 123 married couples (66% of who participated actively in the study) had gotten a divorce within those 16 years. How many couples were still together at the end of the study? I believe that the divorce rates of the couples would be a positive factor in the study; it has the possibility to show how many of those couples whom, in year 7, rated dissatisfaction stayed together. It would also be interesting to see how this study would fare in today’s society. There are many more divorces and “non-traditional” families; would this affect the results? With so many people getting divorced and remarried, trying one type of person then another, would the dissatisfaction rating be the same? Higher? How would same-sex partnerships fare with this study, or how would the results change if the study was rating satisfaction of a second marriage verses the first (would couples learn more the second time around and create a closer bond, lessening the boredom to make the marriage work)? I think there are a lot more areas this study could branch into, looking from the past into the future.
I believe if there is a vaccination that is offered that can prevent the spread of diseases, or the potential risk of cancer it shoul be considered by all parents. Why wouldn’t parents want to consider a vaccination that can protect their child? These days’ children are more active at a younger age, and any kind of protection would be a good idea. I know parents don’t want to think of the idea of their child engaging in sexual activity at such a age, but sexual activity is rising at a younger age. HPV vaccination has been an issue with our society. I didn’t start learning about it until a few years ago when a classmate of mine did a speech on vaccinations on HPV. I think HPV is a serious matter , and parents should educate themselves and their children about the issue. I say why not give both boys and girls the vaccination if there is no harm to them? It would be a way of knowing that you are protecting your child.
I believe if there is a vaccination that is offered that can prevent the spread of diseases, or the potential risk of cancer it should be considered by all parents. Why wouldn’t parents want to consider a vaccination that can protect their child? These days’ children are more active at a younger age, and any kind of protection would be a good idea. I know parents don’t want to think of the idea of their child engaging in sexual activity at such a age, but sexual engagement is rising at a younger age. HPV vaccination has been an issue with our society. I didn’t start learning about it until a few years ago when a classmate of mine did a speech on vaccinations on HPV. I think HPV is a serious matter , and parents should educate themselves and their children about the issue. I say why not give both boys and girls the vaccination if there is no harm to them? It would be a way of knowing that you are protecting your child.
Concerning the article “Should Boys Be Vaccinated Against HPV Virus”, my response would be- yes, they should. In my opinion, both girls and boys should be vaccinated against the HPV virus. It is more important to attempt to prevent cancer causing viruses than to avoid controversial subjects because they relate to sexual activities.
An important reason for the vaccinations is the fact that HPV-related oral cancer has been steadily increasing in men over the past years. Furthermore, HPV causes many different types of health complications that could easily be prevented with the vaccination. To me, it is “common sense” to take action to prevent things which are, in fact, preventable.
The argument from opponents of the vaccination is probably that by vaccinating boys (and girls) it is encouraging them to participate in sexual activities without the risk of contracting HPV. However, the protection would protect individuals for a lifetime.
Many individuals who are opposed to the vaccination might also be concerned about the unknowns about a relatively new drug; however, they could also be erotophilic and be uncomfortable with things related to sex.
Concerning the article “Should Boys Be Vaccinated Against HPV Virus”, my response would be- yes, they should. In my opinion, both girls and boys should be vaccinated against the HPV virus. It is more important to attempt to prevent cancer causing viruses than to avoid controversial subjects because they relate to sexual activities.
An important reason for the vaccinations is the fact that HPV-related oral cancer has been steadily increasing in men over the past years. Furthermore, HPV causes many different types of health complications that could easily be prevented with the vaccination. To me, it is “common sense” to take action to prevent things which are, in fact, preventable.
The argument from opponents of the vaccination is probably that by vaccinating boys (and girls) it is encouraging them to participate in sexual activities without the risk of contracting HPV. However, the protection would protect individuals for a lifetime.
Many individuals who are opposed to the vaccination might also be concerned about the unknowns about a relatively new drug; however, they could also be erotophilic and be uncomfortable with things related to sex.
I think that males should be vaccinated for the HPV virus. I think that anything that can help control any type of disease that harms people should try to be prevented. I do think that a small percent of the population that is vaccinated for the HPV virus may become sexually active faster. I don’t think kids know what the shots they are getting actually do for them. Also, it is imperative that the parents talk to them about their sexual lifestyle so they are educated. I think some more research could be done with these different medicines because they are newer. Some individuals may not want to use the medicines until there have been more evidence showing there is no long term affects.
As a nurse I have given numerous vaccines, although not the HPV vaccine. In general, vaccines are relatively safe, effective, and easy to administer. Unfortunately, one down side is some vaccines may be very expensive. However, the benefits of preventing a disease through vaccination far outweigh the negative effects of getting the disease. This is true for HPV, and any other vaccinated disease (measles, mumps, hepatitis, etc.). No other vaccine has been given discriminatively to one sex over the other, and the HPV vaccine should not be any different. However, before campaigning too hard for males to be vaccinated research on males needs to catch up to that of females to evaluate for effectiveness and for potential risks in males.
The controversy over the prospect of vaccinating is most likely a lack of education and understanding of the situation, and because of the sexual nature. The risk of STI's increases with the number of partners a person has, and with a lack of using condoms. I think a lot of people have a belief of invincibility about themselves that creates a fantasy of "that won't happen to me" or "I am ok because my partner is clean, and we always use protection." What some people don't realize or think about is that the effectiveness of condoms only goes as far as the condom goes. Some diseases, like HPV, can affect the area around the genitals, including the scrotum in men and the vulva in women. These areas are not protected by a condom. Most people also do not use condoms during other activities such as oral-genital sex, again a time when some diseases can be spread. I am not advocating against condoms because they are effective at preventing the transmission of many STI's and do help against HPV. The larger point is that education is needed, especially about the transmission of HPV.
The second problem with the controversy is due to the sexual nature of the vaccine. Except maybe for people who are completely against vaccines, there was not the controversy over the Varicella Zoster (chicken pox) vaccine when it became available. However, there likely would have been a controversy had the vaccine been for the Herpes Simplex-2 (genital herpes) virus, a virus that is in the same subclass in the same virus family as the Varicella Zoster virus. Similarly, HPV has strains of the virus that are not associated with the genitals. I would expect that a vaccine against one of these strains would also not cause the same controversy, although, there really is no reason for a vaccine for a harmless strain of HPV. Vaccines should not be controversial, or raise an issue, just because it relates to sexual behavior. Millions of children are vaccinated every year to prevent harmful effects of a disease, that the person may not even have the chance to be infected by. The HPV vaccine should be treated similarly, as a just in case and not that it means you are expecting to get it just because you got the vaccine.
I have heard a lot about HPV and the controversy over having young children vaccinated to protect them from infection; however, this article has opened my eyes to new information that I previously had not known. After learning that the rate of HPV-related oral cancer has increased in men to the equivalence of oral cancer related to tobacco and alcohol, I believe that both boys and girls should be vaccinated against HPV infection. Many times individuals who are infected with HPV have no symptoms and are therefore unaware that they are carrying the virus. With the rates of individuals who lie to others about having diseases so that they may have intercourse, it is smart to vaccinate children. Both boys and girls should be vaccinated to protect themselves from the virus, and they should also be vaccinated so that they do not unknowingly spread the virus. Our society vaccinates against numerous other viruses that can cause life threatening diseases, and HPV is no different.
I think that some people are upset about the prospect of vaccinating children against HPV infection because it is sexually transmitted. Parents of teenagers do not want to think about their children engaging in sexual relations, and the fact that HPV vaccinations force parents to think about their children engaging in sexual relations when their children are very young causes parents to become disgusted and oppose the concept. Another reason some people are upset about the prospect of vaccinating children against HPV infection is similar to why people are against the use of birth control by adolescents. Some parents believe that vaccinating their children against HPV infection will lead them to believe that they are able to more freely engage in sexual activities, and this is something that no parent wants their children to believe. However, I think that if the issue were presented to parents in a way that emphasizes the potential of life threatening diseases and diminishes the concept that their children will think they can more freely have sexual relations, more parents would want their kids vaccinated.
This issue should definitely be brought into the public eye because it is way more important to protect individuals from factors known to cause cancer than to avoid the issue because it is related to sexual behavior. People need to realize that cancer is a more serious condition and causes much more harm than talking about issues related to sexual behavior.
Post a Comment