Comments
Please wait...
Comments are closed.
Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.
Editors' Picks
is a proud member of the
network
network
All contents © Noisy Creek, Inc.
1101 East Pike St. Suite 300, Seattle, WA 98122
1101 East Pike St. Suite 300, Seattle, WA 98122
Why are gay men 17 times more likely to develop anal cancer than heterosexual men?
The vaccine is a good idea. Time to put the shame, guilt, and mythology aside.
4, It's transmuted sexually.
On the other hand I do think you should give a nod to the ethics of the situation. The push was for girls to get vaccinated because they were the ones at risk for cervical, vaginal, and vulvar cancer, often at young ages and in numbers all out of proportion to the anal cancers seen in gay men. In public health, you typically start by vaccinating the group that stands to benefit most, and then widen your target to include the larger population. This was the same thing the CDC did with the Hep B vaccines, targeting gay men and healthcare workers first. As you know, every kid gets vaccinated for Hep B now, or they don't get into middle school. And no one blinks. With any luck, we'll see a similar development with HPV.
Not all doctors subscribe to this conventional wisdom. A study appearing in the Journal of the American Medical Association concluded that homosexuals should use condoms to protect against the transmission of hepatitis B. Dr. Ralph H. Harder wrote to the journal, "I worry about the loss of objectivity and of scientific approach in current research, at least in dealing with certain sacred subjects. . . . A much more valid and useful conclusion, it would seem, is that anal insertive intercourse is inherently dangerous and should be proscribed."
Sheesh!
What are the behaviors that cause homosexual men to have anal cancer at 17 times the rate in control groups?
What would the good Doctor recommend?
@16
Old stuff.
out of date-
we've come sooo far!
Homosexual men account for 59% of new AIDS cases.
Good Work, Doc!!
The lesson (not that you've shown any capacity for learning) is that a doctor's job is to advise people of the risks of their behavior, if known, and treat the results should someone choose to engage in that behavior anyway. We all choose to engage in countless behaviors that have serious health risks—some have easy, realistic alternatives (eat better), some don't (fall in love with someone else).
Do you consider people who eat fatty foods to be immoral and unworthy of health care? You really want to take your arguments to their logical conclusion and apply them universally? Of course not. You just want to apply them to people who aren't like you.
There's a name for people like that. Bigots.
Who is the hater?
Someone who recognizes that some behaviors are very unhealthy and advocates education so people can keep themselves safe
or
someone who pats you on the head and says 'go ahead, whatever...' and blames AIDS on Reagan and the Fundies?
And @20, if bad behavior were punished you'd be off this site.....and I'd be having a much duller morning.
17 - I think it proves that God is really a straight man, because straight men just love lesbians.
You are the only person who has brought up morality.
The topic is health.
Try to keep up....
Now, if only the vaccine worked against all strains instead of just 4 of them, 2 high-risk (cancer causing) and 2 low-risk (wart causing), we'd be well set. Unfortunately, the "less common" strains will probably just become more common once these 4 strains are routinely vaccinated against.
http://www.foodconsumer.org/newsite/Non-…
If your patients get vaccinated for HPV and do not change their behavior what other diseases will they be at risk for? Will the HPV vaccine prevent AIDS? Venereal disease? The Doctors advice is woefully inadequate and/or criminally negligent.
I hope so!
I think it's just ridiculous that only girls are being vaccinated. WTF? I'm happy to hear that the vaccine has been approved for men and boys, though. I hope they decide to recommend the HPV vaccine for them. For straight guys, wouldn't you want to protect yourself--and therefore protect your future partner, wife, girlfriend, whatever? What would be nice is a reliable test for guys, though. I got diagnosed with HPV last May, and whatever guy gave it to me (Not that I was sleeping with tons of people--the opposite is more like it)--there's no test for them to even know they're passing it around, and it makes me really angry. (Oh, and I did get the vaccine, but I must have aquired HPV after being tested, but before receiving the shot that would have protected me from that specific strain. For those that don't know, there are three rounds that take place over a period of months.)
What I wonder is, what about women who have anal sex and find out they have HPV? Are they more likely to get anal cancer? I have dysplasia of the cervix, but I'm too embarrased to ask my doc is there's anything funky going on in my behind. *ahem* What about oral sex and HPV? That can lead to throat/mouth cancers, right? And who doesn't give oral? So why don't they check your throat for odd cells? Could somebody help me out here? It's been making me nervous for a while. If you have problems from HPV in one spot (Cervix), why can't you have problems from it in another spot (Ass or throat)?
My daughter said the same, with the first shot but was silent with the remaining two. Then again, my son who has asthma as promised not to get the flu to avoid a flu shot.
Getting the vaccine will not prevent all cancers, just the ones caused by the strains the vaccine includes. And the ones that take their place could be worse that the originals.
Vaccines often work, but they are not magic.
"For straight guys, wouldn't you want to protect yourself--and therefore protect your future partner, wife, girlfriend, whatever?"
... and not only that, but it's not like guys go unaffected, either. It's more likely to cause harm in women, true, but guys aren't immune to the effects. That's why it's so mind boggling that they'd say it's just a woman's problem (and if it is, and we're just talking about straight folks, then it's a woman's problem given to them by the men in their lives). That's what my boyfriend's doctor said when he asked about it--"It's a woman's problem. Don't worry about it." What-the-f*cking-f*ck?!?!?!)
34, many men who have HPV have it inside the urethra where it can't be detected casually and provides an unfortunate reservoir to seed the ejaculate. That's probably how you got infected. All your other questions are perfectly appropriate, and have answers. PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE talk to your doctor. Trust me, she has seen it all before.
Your questions are insightful ones.
Political correctness frightens health care providers from providing frank accurate useful information on sexual behavior.
Some behaviors are inherently unsafe and unhealthy.
Condoms mitigate but in no way eliminate the risks.
Unless the core behaviors are addressed even when treatments for particular strains and conditions are developed others will instantly rise up to take their place.
As @29 notes, even if everyone is vaccinated for these 4 strains, if behavior doesn't change (and especially if behavior becomes more risky because people have a false sense of security) new even more virulent strains will quickly arise.
Current practice is a game of "Whack-a-Mole" where, as soon as one disease is addressed, a new one (or two, or five...) pop up.
A better approach would be to unplug the machine and stop the moles at their source, by educating people on what behaviors are unsafe and best avoided.
Will this vaccine prevent Herpes?
Syphilis?
Gonorrhea?
wow!
you really zinged me!!
I'm sure your AIDS and Syphilis and Gonorrhea
infected patients won't mind a bit, when you explain all the technicalities and definitions to them...
It's a proven fact that patients would rather be inadequately treated by a politically correct smart ass than get good useful advice that might challenge their preconceived notions.
Does every child deserve a parent that will teach them that abstinence from sexual activity until marriage is the only 100% effective way to avoid unintended pregnancy and STDs?
@40, does getting a flu shot encourage people to sneeze on each other more because they aren't morally obligated not to anymore?
Why would anyone argue against vaccines? As long as they've been tested and are safe, how can you argue to let people remain MORE vulnerable to potentially deadly diseases?
The HPV vaccine is currently licensed for women ages 11-26. I think that is terribly discriminatory to women over the age of 26. The FDA site says it's because the vaccine has not yet been proven to be safe and effective in women over 26, but it also doesn't seem like it's a big priority for the FDA.
Why are anal cancer and penile cancers much more common in gay men than they are in heterosexual men?
Why are gay men 17 times more likely to develop anal cancer than heterosexual men?
It sounds like a case of 'Sex Advice Columnist Malpractice"...
I am the one who educates my kids about sexuality, i'm the one who needs to excersice good sense and institute in them the values that they need to thrive into a healthy adulthood. I'm responsible for them, the last thing i need are others sending the message to them that having sex outside of marriage or with people of their same sex is okay. If i allow that to happen then i would be irresponsible, throwing them in harm's way. That is what giving this to an 11 year old girl or boy does, it is completely ridiculous to compare this to a flu vaccine cause such a vaccine has nothing to do with sexual behavior, behavior. That's the purpose of an HPV, it is related primarily to sexual behavior, that by no means should imply that it shouldn't be treated in young adults who have free will to engage in sexual behavior but when you try to implement it with minors then your are clearly giving green light to minors to be engage in behaviors which they are not mentally nor physically capable of handling. That's why we have an age of consent.
And troll - of course it's because of the buttsex that there's higher cancer rates. What of it? Similar goes for cervical cancer in women (as someone else pointed out). Should women die of cervical cancer as well, even if they've waited until marriage to have sex? You fail at compassion and logic.
heterosexual vaginal sex does not inherently cause cervical cancer.
but then, the vagina is biologically designed to be a receptive sexual organ.
not so the anus.
could that be a clue?
Since we know what he's getting at, we feel the sting, and he gets to enjoy it without having expressedly said the bit that is hurtful.
So rather, he just states statistics that might suggest Gays communicate more pathogens and lets us come to our own conclusions, or rather our own conclusions of what Allegedly was trying to say without saying.
In the cold hard real world, poverty is, by far, a greater risk facter than gay sexual activity (for Allegedly's sake, specifically buttfuckery) when it comes to susceptability to illness. Poor straight, anally-virginal Christians just get things that are more socially acceptable to Americans, like swine flu and yellow hemorrhagic fever. This, leaving usually Catholic missionaries to explain the embarrassment of indiscriminate bad things happening to mostly good people who don't wear condoms.
So, Allegedly, you know the only way be 100% sure you avoid infection is to abstain... from everything, and stay in a room in which only air filtered of microbes passes through, and live off lactated ringers' fluids for your entire life, and hope your caretakers never make a mistake.
Heck, that's probably why you're so bitter.
Gamble with the future health of your children. Gamble that they will always adhere to your values. You will loose, LC, at some point your children will step away from your enforced values, and they may or may not return. You could easily have them immunized, without telling them what the specific shot was for, have it done when they get their Tetanus or MMR booster. But, no you'd rather risk their lives. Your pathetic, Loveschild, simply pitiful. I hope your children don't have to bear the consequences of your decision. Your response suggests you are unworthy of your children.
It is possible to get HPV through non-sexual behavior. It is spread through skin contact. Your kid could sit on a toilet seat that was previously used by someone with HPV and get infected that way. Rare, yes, but possible.
So you would allow your kids to remain vulnerable in this way just so you could feel morally superior? That's bad parenting. You should protect your kids regardless of how it makes you personally feel.
Nice mom, huh?
So ... is it really economically viable to vaccinate boys.
Sorry, but like all other aspects of public health these recommendations are - have to be - a question of profitability. I know the cancer is horrible for the sufferers, but this is a question of the big picture. One death is a tragedy, a hundred thousand a statistic.
In short, I want to see a cost-benefit analysis.
But, sadly, most don't want it, because they think it's a "girl thing".
61
Sorry, Grandma-
Not all sexually active women are at equal risk to get Cervical Cancer-
The most important risk factor for cervical cancer is infection by the human papilloma virus (HPV). Doctors believe that women must be infected by HPV before they develop cervical cancer.
Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), the virus that causes AIDS, also places women at higher risk for cervical cancer.
Chlamydia is a relatively common kind of bacteria that can infect the reproductive system. It is spread by sexual contact. Women whose blood test results show evidence of past or current chlamydia infection have a higher risk of cervical cancer.
It is not sex that predisposes women to cervical cancer-
It is sex with partners who will infect her with STDs that predisposes a woman to cervical cancer.
?
Don't be so tough on yourself.
If it were true that "Gays communicate more pathogens" (a premise that I do not accept) it would be because gays were engaging in behaviors that facilitate the spread of the pathogens. (@66 explains it well)
Don't blame God.
If a disease occurs disproportionately in a demographic group investigators can find out what behaviors and conditions are responsible and educate affected groups to empower them to protect themselves.
Failure to do so is cruel and irresponsible.
It is not.
It is not about homosexuals.
It is about anal sex.
The rectum is full of bacteria that cause health problems when they get in other body areas.
Uninfected people may safely engage in heterosexual vaginal sex without protection.
Anal sex is always going to be unsafe.
The presence of STDs just makes it more so.
I wonder if the doc will give me a hard time about vaccinating the boys?
Even vaginal sex - you can never be sure who's uninfected. Also, vaginal sex is not totally safe, vaginas can get small tears during sex which can become infected, or yeast infections, etc.
Now don't get too excited. This isn't proof of your theory that god hates gays and blacks (he'd have to hate both for your logic to stand). It's proof that infection isn't necessarily a punishment for promiscuous or gay "behavior." It has as much to do with the community that you're involved with. People in gay communities tend to sleep with other members of the gay community. Middle-class white people tend to sleep with other middle-class white people. Etc.
The lesson is this: if that community that you are involved in has a high infection rate, then YOU are at a greater risk of infection, even if your level of promiscuity is the EXACT SAME as someone in a community with fewer infections. It's sort of like how a person can drive perfectly in extremely heavy traffic, and yet they're still at a greater risk of crashing than someone driving poorly on a deserted road. A gay man doesn't have to be frequenting glory holes every night to be at risk of contracting HIV.
So which conclusion do you draw from this? Can this mean that a virus is simply a neutral non-entity that has nothing to do with god punishing any sort of "behavior," and infection only has to do with the dynamics of how a virus propagates itself? Or does this mean that god hates black people? Pick your answer carefully.
now dwight shame on you did you tell her before hand about your career turning $10 tricks on the Southside?
Fascinating.
You're saying that taking moderate risks in a community where most people are infected is more likely to infect you than taking the same risks in a community where very few people are infected?
This turns the laws of averages and statistics totally on their head!
So I guess, extrapolating these shocking findings, that if I gulped a mouthful while swimming in the untreated lagoon at the sewage plant (don't ask...) I would be more likely to get sick than if I took the exact same gulp from a chlorinated pool?
Amazing!
If you want to make it a fact that gay men have high rates of STD's, then lay it on the line: What's your point?
You have ONE chance to say what your point is, or know just how much of a shitheaded coward you are since you won't even say it from the safety of assured anonymity.
Some "safe" behaviors are safer than others-
Abstinence works equally well and protects totally regardless of the level of infection in the community...
Thanks Grandma-
I'm sure you're very popular with the guys at the nursing home, also.
It works until you find a life partner who shares your values.
We wouldn't 'force' abstinence on anyone (exciting as it may sound...) but if people are educated as to what the actual risks and benefits are of the various brands of 'safe sex' out there many would make an enlightened choice.
Unbiased accurate education is all we are asking for.
We never suggested not vaccinating anyone. Our kids are ALL vaccinated. Everyone should be.
But thinking that a vaccine solves the problem is erroneous and dangerous (and unfair to the naive) and avoids addressing the core problems, which are unhealthy unsafe behaviors.
who are you talking to?
see @93
Welcome, Karla Canadian! We are pleased to have you!
Penile cancers from HPV can also occur among het men and would presumably be prevented by the vaccine. They're just very, very rare.
One point I'm not sure was brought out above: our dismally low rate of vaccinating girls (~30% according to the NPR story) is why vaccinating boys is so much more important in America than in the UK, where they don't have these fundie hangups about sex and therefore vaccinate a much higher percentage of their girls.