Count your blessings, and look at STD statistics...

Post Reply New Topic

which brings up the subject of the vaccine against HPV. Why on earth would anyone ever not want to get vaccinated against this? Especially women.

I wonder if there are anti-vaccs out there who think that their kids will develop autism at 12 or 13 if they get the HPV shot at that age.

As far as I'm aware the argument against the HPV vaccine is that it would be encouraging promiscuity in young people. Which is pretty weak if you ask me, but the religious right in the US have a lot of power. That said in my case if I do have a high-risk strain, it would already have been too late for me because I developed genital warts at age ten.

IIrc the HPV vaccines (there are at least two brands) protect against more than one strain of HPV.

Well yes, so it wouldn't have been useless in that regard.

Your body usually gets rid of HPV within 2 years.

Not that you can help spreading it. If they are sexually active they probably have or have had some form of it anyways. Look at your example you didn't have any sexual contact and you still received it. I wouldn't worry about telling your future ladies .

I feel a lot of people don't know that 1 in 5 people in the United States have genital herpes (1 in 4 women and 1 in 8 men). Gross? Kind of. Despite the discomfort though it is pretty harmless. The biggest downside is the shame you get from having it (thinking people will judge you for being promiscuous or not having safe sex) when in reality a condom is not always effective against herpes and it is possible to be spread even when the infected person is asymptomatic. Really the only STD's to worry about are HIV, Gonorrhea and Syphilis (all preventable with safe sex, and the latter two curable with antibiotics)

Last edited by DWill on 21 Aug 2008, 8:19 pm, edited 1 time in total.

1)Not everyone's body gets rid of HPV in 2 years.

2)HPV the primary cause of cervical cancer (and an increasing cause of oral cancers in men!). It's not harmless.

3)Hepatitis C is easier to get than HIV, is uncurable, has a high fatality rate, and incapacitates many more than it kills.

From my understanding you have got it for life.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hpv

Depending on the strain it's bad for women because of cervical cancer.

I don't think my body got rid of HPV within two years because the genital warts were there for about nine years, in the same place. I was a bit scared of the cryotherapy and had vowed to have them frozen off if I ever got a girlfriend in secondary school, but I never did get a girlfriend in secondary school and eventually gave in and just did it anyway. However, the warts did not reappear after the first treatment. According to my doctor the question of whether my infection is still present, transmittable or high-risk has not been answered by science.

There are certain high-risk strains which have a significant correlation with cervical cancer. Others seem mostly harmless. I have no idea what strains I had or have.

Hector your type is probably low risk. I never said it was harmless. But, it is not always preventable with safe sex practices, so besides regular pap smears or the vaccine sometimes there just isn't anything you can do about it.

I said the body USUALLY gets rid of the HPV virus within two years. Wikipedia says this about it.

It is not always for life depending on your immune system. There is still research being done on it. CDC says this about it

.

Hepatitis C is almost never spread through vaginal penile intercourse. It may happen but usually it requires blood to blood transmission (sharing needles and such).

from the CDC:
http://www.cdc.gov/hepatitis/C/cFAQ.htm#cFAQ09

"Can hepatitis C be spread through sexual contact?
Yes, but the risk of transmission from sexual contact is believed to be low. The risk increases for those who have multiple sex partners, have a sexually transmitted disease, engage in rough sex, or are infected with HIV. More research is needed to better understand how and when hepatitis C can be spread through sexual contact."

Low risk =/= no risk, and the disease is nasty enough that it should be taken into consideration.

I'm actually not that worried about my own experience with HPV, more the reactions of prospective partners upon telling them about it.

Again I never said no risk, just in some situations the risk is so low that it is not even worth worrying about. This would be true if you were say married and your partner had hepatitis C and you wanted children or even to have sex without a condom. The risk is so low that most doctors would just tell you to go ahead and try to have children. If you are having sex with multiple partners then you obviously are going to want to use a condom regardless of if they have Hepatitis C or not.

Quote to emphasize . (Mayo Clinic)

HPV seems to be really common, seems like most people get it.



All the more reason to be careful and have safe sex.

Again from the CDC, same address as above:

"Surveillance data also indicate that 15%–20% of persons reported with acute HCV infection have a history of sexual exposure in the absence of other risk factors. Case reports of acute HCV infection among HIV-positive MSM who deny injecting-drug use have indicated that this occurrence is frequently associated with other STDs (e.g., syphilis). In contrast, a low prevalence (1.5% on average) of HCV infection has been demonstrated in studies of long-term spouses of patients with chronic HCV infection who had no other risk factors for infection."


An average of 1.5% is significantly different from '0-0.6%.'
Despite my great respect for the Mayo Clinic, I'll trust the CDC's numbers.

I wouldn't have unprotected sex with an HCV-infected person and a 1% chance of catching the disease any more than I would have unprotected sex with an HIV-infected person and a 1% chance of catching the disease (note that I'm not saying that's the acutal risk for HIV - I'm just comparing the two in terms of seriousness).

OMG I actually have wear that s**t for my job... Its so uncomfortable, especially trying to fire a rifle uck.

Keep in mind the article I quoted was from 2007 while yours was from 2006 (the study they cited was from 2003) I don't know where the CDC got that stat but here is one of the briefs of the studies they cited (I omitted 212 and 213 because it is for men who have sex with men and obviously there are greater risks for that and 213 was for people having unprotected sex with intravenous drug users.... honestly if you do that you get what you deserve... studies have shown that having one STD increases the risk of getting another). The titles of 212 and 213 are... Lack of evidence of sexual transmission of Hepatitis C virus in a prospective cohort study of men who have sex with men and Hepatitis C virus among self declared non-injecting sexual partners of injecting drug users. Read them if you want they seem to be outside of what we are talking about to me.

This is 211.

Low incidence and prevalence of hepatitis C virus infection among sexually active nonintravenous drug-using adults

"BACKGROUND: The rate of sexual transmission of hepatitis C virus (HCV) is debated. GOAL: The goal was to measure the risk of sexual transmission of hepatitis C virus (HCV) in a sexually active population. STUDY DESIGN: Sexual behaviors and HCV antibody status were measured in persons seeking repeat HIV testing in San Francisco from October 1997 through March 2000. RESULTS: Among 981 repeat testers, the prevalence of HCV antibody was 2.5%. Among men who have sex with men who denied intravenous drug use (n=746), factors associated with HCV antibody positivity include age greater than 50 years (odds ratio [OR], 8.5; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.6-27.7), HIV infection (OR, 5.7; 95% CI, 1.6-20.6), and being nonwhite (OR, 3.3; 95% CI, 1.1-10.0). HCV antibody positivity was not associated with sexual risk behaviors. In 576.6 person-years of observation, no new HCV seroconversions occurred (incidence=0 per 100 person-year; 95% CI, 0-.6), whereas 6 new herpes simplex virus-2 infections (2.8 per 100 person-years) and 10 new HIV infections (1.8 per 100 person-years) occurred. CONCLUSION: The absence of new HCV infections in this sample supports the hypothesis that the risk of sexual transmission of HCV is low."

But really I don't know what we are arguing about. You can get HCV from having heterosexual sex but it is rare. Probably no chance at all if you practice safe sex. If you have multiple sex partners or you are engaging in high risk activities like needle sharing then you are putting yourself at risk for getting HCV not to mention HIV...