why is it this HPV thing has only come to light in the last couple years? This looks to be one devious maladie.

Virus Spread by Oral Sex Is Linked to Throat Cancer

By Rob Stein
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, May 10, 2007; Page A13

The sexually transmitted virus that causes cervical cancer also sharply increases the risk of certain types of throat cancer among people infected through oral sex, according to a study being published today.

The study, involving 100 people with throat cancer and 200 without it, found that those infected with the human papillomavirus were 32 times as likely to develop one form of oral cancer than those free of the virus. Although previous research had indicated HPV caused oral cancer, the new study is the first to definitively establish the link, researchers said.

"It makes it absolutely clear that oral HPV infection is a risk factor," said Maura L. Gillison, an assistant professor of oncology and epidemiology at the Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions in Baltimore, who led the study published in the New England Journal of Medicine.

The findings could help explain why rates of oral cancer have been increasing in recent years, particularly among younger people and those who are not smokers or heavy drinkers, which had long been the primary at-risk groups, experts said.

"There's been a kind of sea change in the last 10 years in who we're seeing with these cancers," Gillison said. "It makes sense with some changes we've seen in sexual behavior."

The findings provide new evidence that contradicts widespread misconceptions about oral sex.

"Many adolescents, and adults too, say they engage in oral sex as a less risky type of sex," said Mark A. Schuster of Rand Corp. and UCLA, noting that herpes, syphilis, gonorrhea, HIV and other sexually transmitted infections can spread through oral sex. "What this article and others show is you absolutely can get serious sexually transmitted diseases through oral sex."

The findings could also provide new ammunition for those advocating wide use of a new vaccine that protects against HPV. Even though the vaccine has not been tested specifically to see whether it reduces the risk of oral cancer, it is designed to protect against the type of HPV associated with the malignancy.

"This adds more data that HPV is an important cause of cancer and that this is an important vaccine," said Joseph A. Bocchini Jr., who chairs the American Academy of Pediatrics' committee on infectious diseases.

The type of oral cancer linked to HPV strikes about 11,000 Americans each year, which is about the same as the number of women in whom cervical cancer is diagnosed.

The finding could also spur calls to vaccinate boys as well as girls because oral cancer affects both.

"This will reinvigorate and shift the debate about who should get vaccinated," said Robert Haddad of the Dana Farber Cancer Institute in Boston.

Proponents of the vaccine have been advocating mandatory vaccination of girls, sparking an intense nationwide debate. Opponents say that the vaccine may encourage sexual activity and that its safety and long-term effectiveness are not clear because it is so new. They argue that the decision should be made by parents individually.

Two other studies published in the same issue of the journal found that the vaccine's protection against genital warts and precancerous growths lasts at least three years. Such growths can lead to cervical cancer.

Gillison and her colleagues focused on a type of tumor called oropharyngeal cancer -- cancer of the tonsils and surrounding tissue. It usually can be treated with surgery, radiation and chemotherapy, but patients can be left with dry mouth and difficulty speaking and swallowing.

The researchers tested 100 people with the cancer and 200 similar subjects without it for HPV infection either anywhere in the body or specifically in the mouth. Researchers also examined factors that would influence the subjects' chances of being infected with the virus or developing the cancer, such as their sexual histories and whether they smoked or drank alcohol.

After other factors were considered, those who tested positive for HPV were 32 times as likely to have oropharyngeal cancer.

When researchers looked at sexual history alone, the number of partners emerged as a risk factor for developing the cancer. Those subjects who had had one to five oral-sex partners were 3.8 times as likely as those with fewer oral-sex partners to have it, whereas those who had more than six oral-sex partners were 8.6 times as likely. It made no difference whether the partners were male or female.

It remains unclear whether kissing someone who has HPV poses any risks, but "it is not out of the realm of possibility," Gillison said.

Get me that fucking vaccine

I think its worth the risk. I mean, a world you cant suck pussy without being paranoid isnt worth living.

Amen, brother, amen.

It's been an issue for a long time. There is currently a vaccine available, Gardasil, manufactured by Merck. A second, more efficacious vaccine is going to licensure in the near future, Cervarix, manufactured by GlaxoSmithKline.

The controversy about the vaccine involves the American religious right movement who sees the vaccine and the prevention of cervical cancer as a license for promiscuity. It's a truly morally bankrupt position.

The CDC fact sheet is here:

http://www.cdc.gov/std/HPV/STDFact-HPV.htm

It could be a case where now the product is available, the producer is sponsering studies that will sell more vaccine. I tend to think that now that the HPV link with cervical cancer has been accepted, HPV is just getting a lot more government research money and so more studies are gonna turn up more connections.

The idea that viruses, and potentially prions, cause cancer is not new, but it's controversial because it would mean that reckless sexual behavior can cause cancer. That's enough to make liberal's head explode.

No. Almost all vaccines have gotten their start in the Academic and/or public sector. Gardasil began as part of a laboratory research breakthrough:

The U.S. Patent Office recognized four claimants to the basic technology—the National Cancer Institute, Georgetown, Queensland, and Rochester.

http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/cont ... l/98/7/433

Industry becomes involved when there is some indication that a product may result from the basic technology. Even then much of the background work in vaccine development is funded by NIH. And the NIH vaccine trials network is essential to showing efficacy. In the lay public safety is the main issue that is talked about, and it's an important one. The initial human trials are always to determine safety. But efficacy is also a life or death matter. And without careful analysis of the data by third parties, how would we know whether something actually works?

Various strains of HPV also cause cervical cancer, genital warts, penile cancer.
6 million new carriers in US each year.
Unfortunately condoms can't stop these little guys.

Still, I encourage all of you to have as many sex partners as possible.

I believe it was that great philosopher Buck Dharma who said,
"history shows again and again how nature points out the folly of man".

I'm not quite sure what to make of these statements. I think that we've been insulted.

Condoms don't prevent viral transmission? Or is it more of an issue that a larger area is shedding the virus rather than just the fluids?

Is Gardasil only labeled for use in women at the moment?

Some viruses are small enough to pass through the condom.

They cut the rate of transmission down substantially. So, yes, they are worthwhile in guarding against HPV. The problem is that genital warts can occur in areas not covered by a condom. It's not a bad idea to take a good look at your partner before having sex, even if you are using a condom.

It's only licensed for women and girls. This is because there are currently no reliable tests for penile or anal cancer, and the link to oral cancers hadn't been found. It's currently being tested for safety in men and boys. Efficacy testing will have to wait, but it may be considered useful for prophylaxis in the near future if the link to oral cancer is substantiated.

Which ones?

The non-latex kind.

Which viruses?

I don't know what the average pore-size of a condom is. I know that HIV, which has a diameter of about 20 nm doesn't go through latex condoms. Papilloma viruses have diameters on the order of about 50 nm. Also, enveloped viruses tend to tend to aggregate giving them a larger effective diameter. I don't think that transmission of viruses through a condom is a common occurance.

Anti-HPV drugs that could save thousands of lives? That's not change we can believe in.

It's religious conservatives who are against the vaccine.

I meant that there are consequences to actions like unprotected sex.



And the anti-corporate "big pharma" crowd.

I have yet to see any real concerted effort against the HPV vaccine from any group but the religious right.