Nurses Helping Nurses
allnurses Network: Central | Jobs | Books | Newsletter
allnurses: A Nursing Community for Nurses
Home General News Blogs Articles Students Region Specialty Degrees F.A.Q.
Nursing News /

HPV Vaccination of Males Not Cost-Effective



Did You Know?
allnurses is the largest community for nurses on the web. We now have over 388,736 members! Join today to network with other nurses, laugh, share, and much more.
Page 2 of 3 < 1 2 3 >

No. 10
from azhiker96
Old Oct 14, 2009, 07:52 PM

Default Re: HPV Vaccination of Males Not Cost-Effective
This study has no bearing currently on whether boys in the US get the vaccine or not.
In the United States, this use of Gardasil — i.e., vaccinating boys to protect against genital warts — was recently recommended for approval by a US Food and Drug Administration Advisory Committee, as reported by Medscape Oncology.
The study was published in a British medical journal and might affect whether that health care system provides the vaccine for their males. They did point out that when resources are scarce, it is more cost effective to vaccinate young girls when trying to prevent cervical cancer.

The editorialists make one other point. The majority of cervical cancer (>80%) occurs in developing countries and in areas of low resources, which cannot afford or access HPV vaccines. "Targeting young women in these populations for HPV vaccination and screening older women would have a bigger effect on reducing the burden of cervical cancer than widespread vaccination of young men from resource-rich areas," they state.
Top
 
Advertisement
Sponsored Links
 
No. 11
Old Oct 15, 2009, 09:50 AM

Default Re: HPV Vaccination of Males Not Cost-Effective
"Good coverage of females obviates the need to vaccinate boys."

This assumes that "covering" young women will be universal and, as said above, that men do not have sex with men. This is sexist and ill-informed.

A methodological note on this study: Their main outcome, QALYs, is weighted against deaths from cervical cancers caused by HPV strains covered by the vaccine. Because men don't die of genital warts from any strain, it appears better to vaccinate women.
Top

1 Reader Gave Kudos
 
No. 12
from D.R.A.
Old Oct 15, 2009, 02:49 PM

Default Re: HPV Vaccination of Males Not Cost-Effective
Hmmm? I see, so when cost is the main motivator one must choose the lesser of two evils -------->possible death of women from cervical cancer OR letting men contract and pass genital warts to each other and unvaccinated women.

Real win win situation there.........either scenario seems bleek. I hope the ones who don't receive the vaccine, be they male or female, get free abstinence information.
Top
 
No. 13
from PeachPie
Old Oct 15, 2009, 06:06 PM

Default Re: HPV Vaccination of Males Not Cost-Effective
Originally Posted by birdgardner View Post
If the entire female population were vaccinated, and everyone were heterosexual, it wouldn't be necessary to vaccinate the boys to protect the girls.

Boys and men who have same-sex intercourse are at risk for anal and throat cancer.
Even with heterosexual sex, they still have the risk of oral cancer. And yes, I have a homosexual friend who got rectal cancer who totally endorses Gardasil for both males and females.

I honestly call BS on the "not cost-effective" angle of this. If women were asymptomatic carriers of a disease that risked men's penises, they'd vaccinate us no matter what the cost.
Top

6 Readers Gave Kudos
 
No. 14
from crimson
Old Oct 16, 2009, 01:14 AM

Default Re: HPV Vaccination of Males Not Cost-Effective
What a load of horse crap! This is just another excuse to lay all responsible on the women. It is a very prevelant disease and if we are going to vaccinate for it, it should be both sexes as the disease affects both sexes. Granted I feel the vaccine needs further testing and tweeking.
Top

1 Reader Gave Kudos
 
No. 15
from abbaking
Old Oct 16, 2009, 12:07 PM

Default Re: HPV Vaccination of Males Not Cost-Effective
As a male victim of HPV, I understand the confusion out there about HPV and low/High risk strains of the virus....
From what I have read and the professionals I have spoken with Low Risk Strains of HPV (the primary strains responsible for genital warts) - pose mimimal risk of the development of cancer.
High Risk Strains usually do not show warts.
HIgh Risk strains of HPV....usually affecting females can lead to the delelopment of cervical and certain gynocological cancers.

Strains 6 and 11 of HPV are the primary strains causing genital warts to develop. These strains of HPV are considered LOW RISK.

A vaccination of males not cost effective? That is disappointing news. But I think that in time and under proper real-life circustances, The medical community and the power that be would understand that HPV is VERY common STD both in males and females. Vaccination, If it is available, safe and effective should be of TOP PRIORITY to all people. This seems like a political fallback and a cheap excuse of part of the drug companies, and the FDA.
Top
 
No. 16
Old Oct 16, 2009, 10:27 PM

Default Re: HPV Vaccination of Males Not Cost-Effective
Originally Posted by Teresag_CNS View Post
"Good coverage of females obviates the need to vaccinate boys."

This assumes that "covering" young women will be universal and, as said above, that men do not have sex with men. This is sexist and ill-informed.

A methodological note on this study: Their main outcome, QALYs, is weighted against deaths from cervical cancers caused by HPV strains covered by the vaccine. Because men don't die of genital warts from any strain, it appears better to vaccinate women.
A thought occurred to me reading this post. My husband is thoroughly unable to get pregnant, yet he is the one, not me, who underwent definitive surgical sterilization due to safety and cost. He sucked it up and took one for the team. I'm thinking guys can suck it up with the Gardasil as well and roll up their sleeves and take one for the team (after considering risks like women should who choose to receive the vaccine), but that's just me on a tangent.
Top
 
No. 17
from bowser301
Old Oct 16, 2009, 10:46 PM

Default Re: HPV Vaccination of Males Not Cost-Effective
hmm can a 7 year old boy get this or is it for like sexually active males?
i just wanna know thanks.
Top
 
No. 18
from azhiker96
Old Oct 17, 2009, 12:47 AM

Default Re: HPV Vaccination of Males Not Cost-Effective
Originally Posted by applescruffette View Post
A thought occurred to me reading this post. My husband is thoroughly unable to get pregnant, yet he is the one, not me, who underwent definitive surgical sterilization due to safety and cost. He sucked it up and took one for the team. I'm thinking guys can suck it up with the Gardasil as well and roll up their sleeves and take one for the team (after considering risks like women should who choose to receive the vaccine), but that's just me on a tangent.
That's actually a good thought and it would work for monogamous relationships.

The study is talking about places where they don't have the resources to vaccinate everyone and they're trying to prevent cervical cancer. Suppose we have a country with a population of 2 million people roughly divided into equal numbers of males and females. However, since we're spending a lot of money to feed them, we can't afford to buy any vaccine. However, a rich country donates 250,000 doses of vaccine. We could either give them all to the young girls and protect 250,000 or give them to the boys and create a dating lottery of sorts. If a girl picked the right guy to date and marry she'd be fine. But if she picked one of the many wrong ones, oh well. Or we could give half to the girls and half to the boys. It seems to me that giving them to the girls prevents the most incidences of cervical cancer.

This is not an issue in the US though. As noted in the OP, the FDA committee has recommended the vaccine for boys as well as girls. In a perfect world with unlimited funds I'm sure they'd vaccinate everybody who cared to be vaccinated no matter the gender.
Top
 
No. 19
from meluhn
Old Oct 17, 2009, 11:11 AM

Default Re: HPV Vaccination of Males Not Cost-Effective
Originally Posted by hiddencat View Post
2nd CEG. There's no way to test men (as far as I know) so immunizing them seems like an extra (needed) step to protecting women from cervical cancer. And with many people not interested in vaccinating for HPV in the first place, are we really in any danger of running out of supplies by "wasting" it on the guys?
FYI--Actually I have heard that you can test men for warts that cant be seen with the naked eye by pouring vinegar on their penises and the warts will turn white--seriously, I really heard this--dont remember when or where.
Top
 
Page 2 of 3 < 1 2 3 >
Reply




Thread Tools


Who's Online
231 members
1,844 guests
2,075

3

Four Lehigh Valley Health Network nurses accused of...

48

lawsuit - But don't most RN's work through breaks/lunch...

0

Patient Evaluation of Retail Clinic Care

7

The hard to reach on-call doctor, and its effects on...

11

Woman charged with passing off prescription drug as...

26

Man in "Vegetative State" was conscious for 23...

2

Interesting article on ThedaCare's Collaborative Care Model

14

Possible breakthrough regarding MS

63

16th Philly area hospital to stop delivering babies: Mercy...

14

Really interesting article on Indian open hearts



45

Dear preceptor

1

Society Needs Care Too

13

Why am I doing this, anyway?

2

Nurse Heal Thyself

10

My Papa, why I am the nurse I am today.

17

I made it through

11

An angel's gaze

16

A Sister Never Forgets

16

Ruby's Marbles

42

What Do Operating Room Nurses Do?

14

My Little Old Jedi

21

I love this job......

23

"I hear voices"

20

Preventing FRUTI (Foley Related Urinary Tract Infection) in...

24

Error and Attitude





Sponsored Links

Currently Reading This Page: 1 (0 members & 1 guests)

Interested in the hottest topics of the week? Subscribe to the Nurse-zine Newsletter.
Enter email address: