University of Miami pediatrician Judith L. Schaechter, M.D. (L) gives an HPV vaccination to a 13-year-old girl in her office at the Miller School of Medicine on September 21, 2011 in Miami, Florida Photo: GETTY IMAGES NORTH AMERICA/AFP/File
health

92% of HPV-caused cancers could be prevented by vaccine: health authority

12 Comments
By JOE RAEDLE

An estimated 92% of cancers caused by HPV could be prevented through vaccination, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) said, adding that boosting immunization coverage was a key priority.

Human papillomavirus was responsible for an estimated yearly average of 34,800 cancer cases between 2012 and 2016, according to a new study published by the CDC, meaning that more than 32,100 cases could have been avoided annually.

The virus can lead to cancers in both men and women, including cancers of the cervix, vulva, vagina, penis, anus, and oropharynx (the back of the throat, including the base of the tongue and tonsils).

"A future without HPV cancers is within reach, but urgent action is needed to improve vaccine coverage rates," said Brett Giroir, assistant secretary for health.

"Increasing HPV vaccination coverage to 80 percent has been and will continue to be a priority initiative for HHS, and we will continue to work with our governmental and private sector partners to make this a reality."

The CDC recommends that all pre-teens get the HPV vaccine when they are 11 or 12 years old to protect them before they are ever exposed.

But new data showed little progress in increasing vaccination rates among 13- to 17-year-olds.

Overall, only 51 percent of teens received all their recommended doses, a two percentage point increase from 2017, with vaccination rates higher among teens whose parents received a recommendation from their doctor.

The report added that although the vaccine is not ordinarily recommended for people over the age of 26, some adults from ages 27 through 45 years who weren't previously vaccinated may benefit if they are at risk and should speak with their doctor for advice.

HPV vaccination is also key to preventing cervical cancer, the report added, recommending a Pap test every three years alongside an HPV test in women aged 21 to 29.

"The HPV test can provide additional information when Pap test results are unclear for women ages 21 and older," the report said.

© 2019 AFP

©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.

12 Comments
Login to comment

Unfortunately in Japan this life saving vaccine has been another victim of the anti vaccination efforts. Antivaxxers don't really care that every year hundreds of women die unnecessarily from preventable cases of cancer with the use of a proven safe vaccine, irrational fear to vague "toxins" or "diseases" is enough to do as much as possible to convince other people to skip getting vaccinated.

And as always the Japanese government chooses to err on the side of excessive prudence and ends up costing lives. Officials don't seem to care that all medical associations in Japan are pushing for the government to recommend the vaccine again (or even subsidize it), as long as they can avoid being seen as "risk takers" politicians will let people die every year. Even the vague ghost of a few dozens of cases of supposed weakness or inespecific pain (that has been demonstrate to happen the same without the vaccine) is enough to justify a thousand deaths.

0 ( +5 / -5 )

Vaccinations are one of science's, and humanity's, greatest achievements. Anti-science peddlers, the religious and trolls directed by hostile governments are ignoring or distorting facts, wilfully causing death and long term disability. Anti-vaxxers are the enemy within.

0 ( +5 / -5 )

Why can't older people get it?

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

Why can't older people get it?

Unless they have specific reasons (allergies, immune problems, current disease, etc.) anybody can, its simply not recommended because the benefits are much more limited. For example, older adults that are already infected with the virus will not have any advantage from being vaccinated. Since the vaccines cost money, the supply is still limited and there are always minimal risks its always better to prioritize applying them to the people that benefit the most first.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Unfortunately in Japan this life saving vaccine has been another victim

Do you know why?

meaning that more than 32,100 cases could have been avoided annually.

This number needs to be compared to the number of serious side effects of those receiving the vaccine. Why not publish those numbers too? There has been a lot of controversy about the HPV vaccine, and not all of it comes from anti-vax nutcases. We should ensure that the benefits outweigh the risks.

How do you compare a one-in-million chance of contracting Guillain-Barré syndrome from the vaccination (WHO figures), with an 80 in one million chance of contracting cervical cancer and a 20 in one million chance of dying from that cancer? What about an unquantified risk of suicidal tendencies among some people receiving the vaccine?

Howling about anti-vaxers is not science.

Some info here:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5967601/

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

with an 80 in one million chance of contracting cervical cancer

Not true. Anti-vaxxers always play fast and loose with facts.

UK statistics show 99.8% cases of cervical cancer are preventable. Vaccination is a part of that.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

UK statistics show 99.8% cases of cervical cancer are preventable. Vaccination is a part of that.

But that's quite unrelated to the numbers I provided of the risk of contracting cervical cancer in the first place. The info I found at the link below was " the incidence rate for cervical cancer was 8.1 cases per 100,000 women per year in the United States". I think that is equivalent to 80 in one million.

https://report.nih.gov/nihfactsheets/viewfactsheet.aspx?csid=76

I'm not an anti-vaxxer, quite the opposite. But I also like to be informed.

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

And how much could be prevented by having safe sex?

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

And how much could be prevented by having safe sex?

HPV can still spread even when having safe sex.

Sex-ed 101.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Do you know why?

He did say why. An "excess of prudence". By excess, it is clear he means that this puts Japan out of step with other developed countries. It's also out of step with the WHO recommendation; this is their stated position on the HPV vaccine (emphasis mine):

"Recognizing the importance of cervical cancer and other HPV-related diseases as global health problems, WHO recommends that routine HPV vaccination should be included in national immunization programmes...For the prevention of cervical cancer, the WHO-recommended primary target population for HPV vaccination is girls aged 9–14 years, prior to becoming sexually active." 

https://www.who.int/immunization/policy/position_papers/pp_hpv_may2017_presentation.pdf

But that's quite unrelated to the numbers I provided of the risk of contracting cervical cancer in the first place.

And your numbers are quite unrelated to the efficacy of the vaccine or the desirability of administering it. You're just using your usual approach to vaccine discussions: "but what about the side effects?". Which you never really go into, or bother to present any useful data. You also seem to think it's acceptable to insist on viewing vaccines in terms of risk while blowing off the actual risks of what they're vaccinating against.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

Of course the CDC is to be trusted. ha ha ha Talk your own book. What BS !!

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

Do you know why?

Read the whole comment, it is clearly explained there. Political popularity above the lives of people.

 There has been a lot of controversy about the HPV vaccine, and not all of it comes from anti-vax nutcases. We should ensure that the benefits outweigh the risks.

It already been done, the scientific consensus is that the benefits hugely outweighs all realistically possible risks. People that insist on discredited vague "risks" even after it has been explained to them with scientific data that can be corroborated can validly be categorized as irrational antivaxxers.

How do you compare a one-in-million chance of contracting Guillain-Barré syndrome from the vaccination (WHO figures), with an 80 in one million chance of contracting cervical cancer and a 20 in one million chance of dying from that cancer? 

Easily, by demonstrating that people that have not been vaccinated also have the same one in a million chances, so if you did not increased the risks in a detectable way but decrease the risk of death significantly the benefits outweight the risks. Not that this will stop people from repeating this falsified argument over and over again, its part of being antivaxxers

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28935469

What about an unquantified risk of suicidal tendencies among some people receiving the vaccine?

What about it? if its unquantified for all we know the vaccine is even protecting from suicide, right?

There is absolutely no evidence of any increase of death by any cause in vaccinated population when compared with unvaccinated people, that indicates that in order to use this argument you first need evidence that there is something going on first instead of just vague possibilities.

Howling about anti-vaxers is not science.

It can be, if you support it with data, test an hypothesis and report your methods,

Otherwise it can be just simple doing your civil duty, informing people so they don't have only to listen to the lies of people that care only about feeling superior even if that means putting others at risk.

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/14760584.2019.1584040

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites