Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Toronto Star)   World's laziest scientists haven't yet evaluated the effectiveness of the new HPV vaccine because they're "waiting for the first cohort of girls to become sexually active - they're about 19 years old now"   (thestar.com) divider line 91
    More: Fail, HPV, Human sexual activity, HPV Vaccine, Becky Maddigan, vaccination programs, Brampton, adverse effect, value for money  
•       •       •

6794 clicks; posted to Main » on 05 Oct 2013 at 6:48 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



91 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-10-05 08:01:08 PM  

BumpInTheNight: You know what, I'm not going to keep reading through paragraphs of some nutjob trying to justify giving teenage boys a cure to cervical cancer just to figure out what the hell subby is smoking.


HPV causes other cancers also.
 
2013-10-05 08:03:36 PM  

ZAZ: And when determining the cost-effectiveness of a vaccine, it's important to remember how costly HPV is, she says, adding diagnosing and treating related infections costs the Canadian health care system more than $300 million each year.

There are a half million Canadians per year. The vaccine costs $500. Effectiveness against the four targeted strains is 56%; let's say it cuts expenses by a half because the many non-targeted strains are less important. So they are talking about spending $250 million per year to save $150 million per year. Add in value of life saved and maybe the vaccine is cost neutral. I don't see a strong case for aggressively promoting it, unless you own shares in Merck.


Speaking as someone who does cost-benefit analyses which include the cost of a human life, I can help you out with your calc. It's approximately $1 million.
 
2013-10-05 08:05:42 PM  

sheep snorter: Lets see.... GOV Rick Perry's best bud made billions of dollars off of Perry forcing high school sluts to be injected and billions of dollars more by then forcing high school boy sluts to get injected with the vaccine, even though its chances of death or other, was quite high and maybe violated medical ethics laws.


OK, let's play "count the factual inaccuracies".  the HPV vaccine was not mandatory for anyone, males or females.  It does not have any significant side effects, other than being one of the more painful of the vaccinations..  There's very few examples of "reportable adverse effects".  As far as I know, nobody has died from it.

On the other hand, getting boys and girls vaccinated with the entire Gardasil course will totally prevent them from acquiring the strains of HPV which are responsible for about 80 percent of cases of cervical cancer, and a few cases of mouth and throat cancer in guys.  I got my kids the shots the first week my insurer would pay for them.  At least I know my daughter is protected from that cancer, and my son's unable to GIVE HPV to a girl which might cause her to develop cervical cancer.

Florida's governor is a criminal, a scumbag, and involved in a multibillion dollar medical fraud.  But this particular situation was not it.
 
2013-10-05 08:13:41 PM  
I'm confused, if the province can get the vaccine for girls at $220, why is it $500 for boys? Can't they just order a little extra from Merck and charge $220 if a boy wants the vaccine? I mean, it's the same shot, right?

I realize the woman in TFA wants it for free, but since it seems that's not going to happen - how about half way?
 
2013-10-05 08:20:02 PM  

bearded clamorer: Should have conducted the study in Arkansas.
Would have had 5 years of data by now.


Yeah but you''d be two years too late.
 
2013-10-05 08:24:18 PM  

varmitydog: Wait.........three out of every four Canadians has a venereal disease?
I figure that the mom in TFA has it since she is so eager to get her kid a shot for it.


Yes. A vast majority of people have or have had HPV. It often shows no symptoms and there is not even a test for it in males unless visible warts are present (most people who carry it do not have the warts). I know nothing about you, but statistically speaking, if you're having sex, you most likely have it.
 
2013-10-05 08:25:17 PM  

Ambivalence: Vaccinating boys can protect the population of women who are too old to have had the vaccine.


So, the only reason our society should pay to vaccinate boys from something that gives them cancer, is when it stops them from being a vector to girls? It is a lovely society we have made no?
 
2013-10-05 08:28:39 PM  

Suckmaster Burstingfoam: Speaking as someone who does cost-benefit analyses which include the cost of a human life, I can help you out with your calc. It's approximately $1 million.


It would be nice if we had some sort of policy (official or even unofficial) that says what a human life is worth.  Not what insurance companies are deciding behind closed doors, but out in the open for everyone to discuss.  It drives me up a wall when the govt. makes a law to save lives, but it costs 7 billion dollars and is projected to save 20 lives over the next 50 years.  When you think of what we could do with that 300 million, is saving a 47 year old auto mechanic in Cleveland in 2034 really the best use of that money?  Yeah, it sucks for him and his family, but $300 million would feed a lot of starving orphans (or whatever).  It sounds heartless, but public policy would be so much better if we put a value on deciding if it is worth it to save a life.  Of course, people are too squeamish to have a rational discussion about this.

/It would probably be set way too high or way too low.  -
 
2013-10-05 08:28:48 PM  

ReapTheChaos: 19 and they aren't sexually active yet? Did they only give it to fat girls or are they having the kids answer that question in front of their parents? Pretty much all teens become sexually active around 14-16.


As a parent, I'd act outraged, but as literally the only girl in my class who didn't have a baby or an abortion by the time we all graduated, I have to agree.

/my kids are 3
//all my HS friends' kids are 15-18
 
2013-10-05 08:29:10 PM  
1.  This is a vaccine that can prevent several different types of cancer.  It should be given to as many as want it.  I know that cervical cancer and throat cancer and the others are not as prevalent as polio but that vaccination program was free and it worked.  Being an olde phart, I remember friends living in iron lungs.  Kids today, fortunately, don't even know what the hell an iron lung is.

2.  Merck spent a ton of money (more than Jonas Salk and his compatriots ever had to spend to get polio vaccines approved) to prove the efficacy of this vaccine.  They should be compensated.  Let's have all of the governments interested in providing protection for their youngsters kick in a couple million each to cover the cost, pay a nominal dividend to the stockholders and then cut loose every drug company that wants a shot at developing the vaccine compete on the open market.  Watch the price drop like a rock.  Have those same governments that funded the "patent buyout" be able to negotiate the best price with whichever company they choose, based on volume required and projections of needs.

3.  Convince religious fundamentalists that HPV, even though it is commonly spread via sexual activity, can also be spread via any number of other means, including Bible study with older adults who weren't  vaccinated as youngsters.

4.  Watch the targeted cervical, throat, mouth, and other cancers go the way of polio and smallpox.

/and if they wanted data on this study earlier, they should have administered the vaccine to Catholic schoolgirls and Protestant Preachers' daughters.  They'd have 6 years of data by the time they reached the age of 19.  Not that I'd know anything about that from my distant past.
 
2013-10-05 08:41:27 PM  
Waiting for pics of hot 19-yr-olds.

/leaving disappointed
 
2013-10-05 08:43:20 PM  
Creepy.....like Lou Gosset Jr. preaching to a handpicked list of Honey Boo Boo's list of consorts kind of creepy
 
2013-10-05 08:55:39 PM  
I had a thing for this Canadian teenager

www.sydlexia.com
 
2013-10-05 08:57:30 PM  

cardex: Why are we even talking about it 500 per person to prevent painful death in some is well b worth it not even looking at the rectal, and mouth cancers it will also prevent


Not only that. Oral rectal and cervical cancers are just the cancers we know have associated HPV with. There are likely other cancers and diseases that the vaccine will prevent that we have not made a correlation to the virus.
 
2013-10-05 08:58:04 PM  

jaytkay: sheep snorter: the vaccine, even though its chances of death or other, was quite high

I see the renowned epidemiologist, Dr. Michelle Bachmann, has arrived.


Using the word "sluts" twice put me more in mind of Rush Limbaugh.  Maybe they had a love child?
 
2013-10-05 09:05:11 PM  

fusillade762: Using the word "sluts" twice ...


I like sluts.
 
2013-10-05 09:23:22 PM  

oldsbone: Suckmaster Burstingfoam: Speaking as someone who does cost-benefit analyses which include the cost of a human life, I can help you out with your calc. It's approximately $1 million.

It would be nice if we had some sort of policy (official or even unofficial) that says what a human life is worth.  Not what insurance companies are deciding behind closed doors, but out in the open for everyone to discuss.  It drives me up a wall when the govt. makes a law to save lives, but it costs 7 billion dollars and is projected to save 20 lives over the next 50 years.  When you think of what we could do with that 300 million, is saving a 47 year old auto mechanic in Cleveland in 2034 really the best use of that money?  Yeah, it sucks for him and his family, but $300 million would feed a lot of starving orphans (or whatever).  It sounds heartless, but public policy would be so much better if we put a value on deciding if it is worth it to save a life.  Of course, people are too squeamish to have a rational discussion about this.

/It would probably be set way too high or way too low.  -


My $1M figure is the official number used, like I said, in cost-benefit analyses that I do for my province in Canada.

I'd expect there is a similar number for each US state. Or maybe at the federal level.

We don't talk about it with you muggles though. Cos yes, one can run into some neurotic screaming biatch who accuses us of farking genocidal hate because we didn't consider her dead son's life valuable enough to build some crazy billion dollar safety feature that might have saved him til the next time he decided to do something stupid.
 
2013-10-05 09:24:23 PM  
This thread needs exemplars of what a 19 year old girl might look like.

alt.coxnewsweb.com
 
2013-10-05 09:28:24 PM  
Can't you even catch hpv even if you're wearing a latex crash helmet?

Or is that a different disease I'm thinking of.
 
2013-10-05 09:32:25 PM  

HotWingAgenda: This thread needs exemplars of what a 19 year old girl might look like.

[alt.coxnewsweb.com image 318x450]


74.53.26.139

(GIS for Brazil model 19 year old ((don't your dare judge me)) (((parentheses))))
 
2013-10-05 09:34:43 PM  

thisisyourbrainonFark: HotWingAgenda: This thread needs exemplars of what a 19 year old girl might look like.

[alt.coxnewsweb.com image 318x450]

[74.53.26.139 image 640x835]

(GIS for Brazil model 19 year old ((don't your dare judge me)) (((parentheses))))


I will judge you and I judge you to be:

66.147.244.204
 
2013-10-05 10:00:30 PM  

ZAZ: Occam's Disposable Razor

The 56% figure is in the article:However, a study by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, published in the June issue The Journal of Infectious Diseases, showed the vaccine had cut HPV infections by 56 per cent among teenage girls, since its introduction in 2006. (The reduction was among infections from the four strains of HPV the vaccine targets.)


Yeah, but that doesn't mean the vaccine is only 56% effective. That makes the rest of your math way off.
 
2013-10-05 10:10:50 PM  

Yes please: ZAZ: Occam's Disposable Razor

The 56% figure is in the article:However, a study by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, published in the June issue The Journal of Infectious Diseases, showed the vaccine had cut HPV infections by 56 per cent among teenage girls, since its introduction in 2006. (The reduction was among infections from the four strains of HPV the vaccine targets.)

Yeah, but that doesn't mean the vaccine is only 56% effective. That makes the rest of your math way off.


I think they have a vaccine for math.
 
2013-10-05 10:13:54 PM  

iron de havilland: iron de havilland: meanmutton: iron de havilland: ZAZ: The vaccine costs $500.

The vaccine is sold for $500.

It costs a lot less than that.

So get farkig insurance and then it's free.

Meh. I've just posted in another thread about how farked up America's healthcare system is.

I won't repeat it, but Americans do seem to enjoy putting Americans through all sorts of pain and suffering for what is a cornerstone of most developed societies.

You sick fark.

Ok, I'll develop this a little bit.

I've been on various medications for the past couple of years. Upfront cost? 0.

As I posted in the other thread, the NHS got my mother through breast cancer. Upfront cost? 0.

Any of my friends who have to take prescription drugs regularly? Upfront cost? Well, it may cost a tenner or so in England and Wales, actually. Not sure about that.

And I'll repeat: The NHS is not perfect. But I log in to the innerwebz and so many Americans complain about how awful the healthcare they suffer is. They fund so many public projects with their taxes, but are unwilling to fund something that every American would benefit from.

Weirdos.


Jesus and the Protestant work ethic saving souls.
 
2013-10-05 10:14:50 PM  

swaniefrmreddeer: Most 19 year old girls aren't sexual active, they just lie there motionless, like their mothers.


I laughed.

But most of the 19 year-olds I slept with back when didn't just lie there - they were into it.
 
2013-10-05 10:30:09 PM  

oldsbone: It would be nice if we had some sort of policy (official or even unofficial) that says what a human life is worth.  Not what insurance companies are deciding behind closed doors, but out in the open for everyone to discuss.  It drives me up a wall when the govt. makes a law to save lives, but it costs 7 billion dollars and is projected to save 20 lives over the next 50 years.  When you think of what we could do with that 300 million, is saving a 47 year old auto mechanic in Cleveland in 2034 really the best use of that money?  Yeah, it sucks for him and his family, but $300 million would feed a lot of starving orphans (or whatever).  It sounds heartless, but public policy would be so much better if we put a value on deciding if it is worth it to save a life.  Of course, people are too squeamish to have a rational discussion about this.


We do, and insurance companies do weigh in, but in an adversarial system (lawsuits).  We also do cost benefit analysis of programs.  Here is an article with an example, where the EPA puts the cost at $7.4 million.  

http://www.businessinsider.com/the-epa-has-tabulated-the-value-of-a- hu man-life-2012-8 

Or here is an international study that shows it across multiple 1st world countries. 

http://www.bath.ac.uk/e-journals/jtep/pdf/Volume_34_Part_2_169-188.p df 

The data is out of date on both (2006 on the first one, even although the article is newer, and early 90's on the second one.)  We are middle of the pack.  Japan and Switzerland place a much higher value.  South Korea and Taiwan compared to the rest of the 1st world, put lower values.

And of course, some Wikipedia on the U.S. data:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Value_of_life
 
2013-10-05 10:47:22 PM  

Relatively Obscure: I can help with this.  For science.


So you admit to having genital warts. For science.
 
2013-10-05 11:07:48 PM  
Isn't collectivism grand?

Can't wait until these lines of thought on costs and such create a popular eugenics movement. I'm sure it will have a nicer name that hasn't been sullied when it happens.
 
2013-10-06 12:01:31 AM  

HotWingAgenda: This thread needs exemplars of what a 19 year old girl (with a generous helping of Photoshop) might look like.

img.fark.net

 
2013-10-06 12:20:51 AM  
"HPV or Human Papillomavirus, the most common sexually transmitted infection. After all, it affects both males and females, infecting three out of four Canadians in their lifetime "


Whats your problem, canada?
 
2013-10-06 01:44:37 AM  

BumpInTheNight: hardinparamedic: BumpInTheNight: You know what, I'm not going to keep reading through paragraphs of some nutjob trying to justify giving teenage boys a cure to cervical cancer just to figure out what the hell subby is smoking.

You do realize that sexually active men are the main vector for the spread of HPV, and HPV causes penile cancer, correct?

No, no I did not, I knew it'd cause the occasional wart but not male junk cancer too.  If it does then all good I'd change my stance to $500 injections for all.  No one deserves cancer of the junk.


You knew it caused cervical cancer. Oh and btw, odds are very good you've been infected if you've had sex with anyone who's had sex with anyone else. 90% chance if you were sexually active in college.

Sleep well.
 
2013-10-06 01:48:21 AM  

Lady Indica: BumpInTheNight: hardinparamedic: BumpInTheNight: You know what, I'm not going to keep reading through paragraphs of some nutjob trying to justify giving teenage boys a cure to cervical cancer just to figure out what the hell subby is smoking.

You do realize that sexually active men are the main vector for the spread of HPV, and HPV causes penile cancer, correct?

No, no I did not, I knew it'd cause the occasional wart but not male junk cancer too.  If it does then all good I'd change my stance to $500 injections for all.  No one deserves cancer of the junk.

You knew it caused cervical cancer. Oh and btw, odds are very good you've been infected if you've had sex with anyone who's had sex with anyone else. 90% chance if you were sexually active in college.

Sleep well.


Oh and PS...you can be completely asymptomatic...until your dick gets cancer. You may not get a single wart, and unlike women...you're not tested with a male version of a pap smear annually. If you carry the virus, your system might be able to clear it. Penis cancer has a 5 year survival rate of over 50%

but who'd want to live like that? Not you I bet.

Sweet dreams. :)
 
2013-10-06 01:49:26 AM  

Donnchadha: Of course they aren't sexually active yet -- people have been waiting until their mid 20's to get married these days.


ROTFLMAO
 
2013-10-06 02:31:06 AM  
We need to start looking at how much some of these people that could be saved from HPV would actually be spending back into the economy if they lived.  I mean, whose got HPV but skanks or nice gentlemen that have been led down the wrong path by skanks?

Even if your son or daughter is not yet having sex, exposure can happen with any kind of adolescent experimentation that involves genital contact with someone who has HPV-intercourse isn't necessary.

Skanks be spraying their skank juice and this needs to be stopped.  It doesn't even require intercourse according to the government site.  If you frighten one or back it into a corner, they might dowse you in HPV juice and likely there won't be a nearby juice washing station available.
 
2013-10-06 07:59:02 AM  

CleanAndPure: Can't you even catch hpv even if you're wearing a latex crash helmet?

Or is that a different disease I'm thinking of.


You can still get it, but condoms do dramatically decrease transmission.

Hpv is super contagious. Transmission rate is something like 80% with just one unprotected encounter with an infected partner.

Compare that to herpes, where transmission is 10% or less over a whole year of unprotected encounters with an infected partner.

/and yet 20% of american women have herpes.

//there's a lotta unprotected sexxin going on out there.

///vaccinate your kids.
 
2013-10-06 08:51:15 AM  
God works in mysterious ways.
 
2013-10-06 09:00:01 AM  
Fark headline: 19 year old girls need sex! Sexy sex! (post pics here!)

Fark readers: I blame Bush and Christians for expensive healthcare! Socialism! Let's argue about per dose prices for drugs and capitalism!

Seriously, nerds, get it together.
 
2013-10-06 01:37:07 PM  

ZAZ: costermonger

I'm comparing vaccinating nobody vs. vaccinating everybody. There isn't enough cost savings in the whole population to make prevention cheaper than treatment.

And iron de havilland does have a point. If the vaccine were nationalized via a mandatory cost-plus contract, and could be delivered for $100 per person, offering the vaccine to everybody would be a good idea.


Dipshiat, that's $300 million PER YEAR. Vaccinate everyone, and your savings continue year after year. In two years, you break even, in 10 you've saved $1.5 billion. Not to mention the savings in human suffering. Genital warts suck.
 
2013-10-06 01:59:39 PM  

RecentGrad: hpv also causes genital warts...


Warts are nothing more than speed bumps on the highway of love.
 
2013-10-06 09:08:21 PM  

oldsbone: Suckmaster Burstingfoam: Speaking as someone who does cost-benefit analyses which include the cost of a human life, I can help you out with your calc. It's approximately $1 million.

It would be nice if we had some sort of policy (official or even unofficial) that says what a human life is worth.  Not what insurance companies are deciding behind closed doors, but out in the open for everyone to discuss.  It drives me up a wall when the govt. makes a law to save lives, but it costs 7 billion dollars and is projected to save 20 lives over the next 50 years.  When you think of what we could do with that 300 million, is saving a 47 year old auto mechanic in Cleveland in 2034 really the best use of that money?  Yeah, it sucks for him and his family, but $300 million would feed a lot of starving orphans (or whatever).  It sounds heartless, but public policy would be so much better if we put a value on deciding if it is worth it to save a life.  Of course, people are too squeamish to have a rational discussion about this.

/It would probably be set way too high or way too low.  -


It would be set way too low, because the people making the decisions about it are inherently tied to the people that stand to lose/gain the most money out of their decision..  Also, the legal precedence would basically destroy modern society and perhaps the world.  I know you're suing me for six million dollars because I was drunk and ran over you, turning you into a quadriplegic, but no one asked you to pay six million dollars to stay alive.  This book right here says a human life is only worth $10,000, which consequently all I'm going to pay you for your medical bills+pain/suffering+disability.
 
2013-10-06 09:40:04 PM  

oldsbone: It would be nice if we had some sort of policy (official or even unofficial) that says what a human life is worth.  Not what insurance companies are deciding behind closed doors, but out in the open for everyone to discuss.


The values used for statistical value-of-human-life aren't decided in a vacuum, per se. If I understand correctly, they're extrapolated from how much people are willing to pay to reduce risks.

Though as bad as people are at assessing risk, I'm not surprised the estimates are somewhat divergent.
 
Displayed 41 of 91 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report