The efficacy of the vaccine against cancer is unknown CN Purandare, Alka Kriplani & Neerja Bhatla IN India, cervical cancer is the second most common cancer in women, accounting for nearly one-fourth of the global burden of cervical cancer, with an estimated 122,800 new cases and 67,500 deaths annually, which is more than the number of deaths due to maternal mortality.Since these women are usually in their 40s and 50s, it is estimated that the years of life lost are greater in cervical cancer.
A large body of evidence supports the safety and efficacy of the vaccine, and several studies have found that getting the shots does not lead to kids engaging in more risky sexual behavior.
“That’s been pretty persuasively put to bed,” Schwartz said.
Dr Jose Montoya, a professor of medicine at Stanford University explains that the condition usually starts with an insult to the immune system—a severe infection, a car crash, a pregnancy.
The first symptoms are flu-like, but months go by and the patient realizes she isn’t getting better.’ In a few genetically predisposed individuals, Montoya told the Slate editor, it is “biologically plausible” that the vaccine, which mimics a natural infection, could also trigger an immune response powerful enough to lead to CFS.
There are about 100 strains of HPV, and the vaccine only protects against 2, 4, or 9 of them, depending on the brand and 95% of HPV infections heal by themselves – potentially granting the individual lifetime immunity against the particular strain.
Perhaps to improve uptake of the vaccine the manufacturers promote it as an anticancer vaccine rather than a vaccine against sexually transmitted disease.While the HPV vaccine has been successful in cutting down the rate of infection, it hasn’t been easy to get Americans on board to vaccinate their pre-teens.According to CDC data, less than half of girls and even fewer boys had completed the three dose series of shots in 2013.There is no evidence the confidential study protocol was submitted to regulators for approval.The worksheet investigators used allotted just one line per entry for new medical history, with no measurement of symptom severity, duration, outcome, or overall seriousness.Trial participants complained to Slate that repeated complaints of debilitating symptoms were not even registered in the study as potential side effects.