- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Oral cancer from HPV up 300% in men
Posted on 3/9/18 at 1:00 pm to EA6B
Posted on 3/9/18 at 1:00 pm to EA6B
quote:
The risk was miniscule, increasing miniscule to 13,200 cases out of 95 million men over age 21, is still miniscule, but stating it as a 300% increase makes it sound scary.
That is because it is a not-so-well-hidden gardisil ad.
Posted on 3/9/18 at 3:41 pm to goofball
quote:
symptoms should I look out for?
See your dentist every six mos for a regular check-up. That's what caught mine in the early stage. Referred me to an oral oncologist. They took care of it.
Don't go down there unless you really know the girl.
Posted on 3/9/18 at 3:50 pm to High C
Damn read this thread and told my ole lady I aint eating the puss anymore. She was not pleased
Posted on 3/9/18 at 6:56 pm to 50_Tiger
quote:
if you're over 26 then it has no effect
This is not entirely accurate...the FDA indication initially was capped at age 26, and insurance didn't typically pay for it outside of 9-26 age range. I believe Merck at one time submitted data on ages 27-45 (women), and although showed promise, the FDA asked for more data - I am not sure of the status of this investigation, though certainly by age 26 in most individuals, the hay is out of the barn, so to speak. I would like to see studies expanded
quote:
Research the strains of HPV that "may" cause cancer. Then crosscheck that vs the strains Gardisil covers.
The science behind the link is legitimate. Maybe it is irresponsible for me to come on here and post anecdotal observations, but I have seen a clear decline in high-grade squamous lesions (moderate dysplasia to carcinoma in-situ) of the cervix in younger women in the last 10 years. Gardasil has been out since 2006. I think this is important because legitimate large-scale epidemiological studies back this up. The logical extension is that these women will likely not develop cervix, vaginal, vulvar and anal (ie squamous epithelium) cancers, as the HPV pathway is clearly demonstrated on a molecular level. In my more than 20 year career, I have seen hard evidence that demonstrates this link between a number of HPV subtypes and female genital cancers of the squamous type, and it is difficult to listen to baseless claims that suggest otherwise. As for more opinion, there is no reason to think that significant HPV disease is not eradicable by a highly effective vaccination program.
quote:
Next, research the deaths and side effects attributed to gardisil.
One will be hard-pressed to honestly find any legitimate sources that provide any evidence that the vaccine is unsafe. The number of doses is very high and the data is very credible.
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News