The Student Room Group

STIs and Smear tests - information and questions

Scroll to see replies

scaryhair
I'm going to have it done when it's available, but it's just for 12-13 years olds at the mo.

Well our school said that us yr 13 girls should have it to, but we can decline. though haven't heard much more about it since, so i don't know when its supposed to be happening
Reply 181
lasts 10 years, then you have to pay over £100 to have it again:frown:
Reply 182
Viridis
I got a letter in the post yesterday about the cervical cancer vaccination.

It said any young women born between 1st September 1990 and 31st August 1991 is being invited to get it done.

Probably will get it done.


No fair. No one asked me to have it done...
aeiou81
In the future it will only be offered to girls aged 12-13, but at the moment the government are running a "catch up" scheme to ensure that all girls currently aged 18 or below will have a chance to receive it. This means that for the next few years, girls in year 13 will be offered it too until this year's year 8s get to that age. The only reason they aren't offering it to everybody is because they expect that many women aged over 18 have already been exposed to the virus through sexual activity, rendering the vaccine pointless. However, if you do want to get it done you should talk to your GP. :smile:


Ahhhh I see now. Yea that makes sense actually as the majority of my friends (aged 21/22) are sexually active and have been since they were 17/18.

After reading what has happened to Jade Goody (which I really do hope she pulls through and beats it), its kinda scared me now into looking into this vaccination. Failing that, I'll just sit and wait for a smear screening from my GP . . .:s-smilie:
Reply 184
My sister's just phoned me up telling me she's getting this jab tomorrow. If anything, I'm jealous; the more stuff I'm immune to the better - I want it!
Reply 185
I doubt I'll be getting it anyway, even if my Catholic school offers it :p:
I haven't had it but I wouldn't mind. I've had almost every other vaccination under the sun :rolleyes:
Reply 187
I'm 16 and got the jag today. It was free so I had no complaints! Even if my arm still is a little bit sore.
benwellsday
The only thing I have against this vaccinnation is the way it is publicised as a cure to cervical cancer. It's a vaccinnation for HPV, which can cause cervical cancer, but it in no way protects you form cervical cancer, which is clearly going to confuse most people in year 8. If they'd called it the HPV vaccine though, most people would be like "meh, HPV, I don't even know what that is.". Still what do I care, I'm fairly certain I don't have a cervix.

Nowhere does it say it is a cure, its essentially a cervical cancer vaccine.

Most vaccinations are not 100%. The TB one (BCG) for instance is only 60-70% effective.
benwellsday
Medication is really expensive, that's about it, blame the drug companies. Inhalers are like free on the NHS but it costs them £70 per inhaler or something. I forget some of the other insane prices are. Some cancer treatments run into tens of thousands I believe. That's why, as much as the NHS sucks, you can't complain.

To be fair that is because they are far from easy to produce. It really does cost a lot of money to produce drugs. If you don't do it properly then people die from taking them.
I think the controversy is that it also protects boys against something else but they only give it to girls
Reply 191
It makes me laugh how some parents are against it because it "promotes promiscuity", but in reality, how many teenagers know ANYTHING about HPV? I didn't even know it existed until way after I'd left school, and that was because of TSR I think. My school's STI education consisted almost entirely of a gross-out slideshow followed by, "always use a condom." If anything, the girls who are educated enough about STIs to know about HPV are probably in the know enough to still use a condom.

Not to mention that people don't abstain from sex just because they worry about STIs :rolleyes:
Jamie
To be fair that is because they are far from easy to produce. It really does cost a lot of money to produce drugs. If you don't do it properly then people die from taking them.


Yeah I know vaccinnations aren't 100%, I was just exxaggerating to make the point, a few people have actually heard of it as a cervical cancer vaccine which puts across the wrong idea.
And we did some basic drug synthesis in chemistry A-level, it must be crazy, the amount of purification etc. I can understand the costs, but drug companies are still one of the richest types of company. I guess they don't have to advertise in the same way as other companies though, people will find out about medicines in other ways.
My main point is that people shouldn't get there hopes up about this being a step towards a cancer vaccine. It should be good for people who are weak to HPV though, and I'm sure some types of genetical trait may put you at risk of having a weaker defense to HPV, and so in that respect the vaccine may be useful for a family history of cervical cancer. It's hard to say because I am neither a doctor, nor good at biology type things.
I'm going to be getting it, since I qualify :smile:
Im all for it, but feel slightly resentful because it probably won't be offered to me-at 21, am I over the hill and too old to receive something which could potentially save my life? When I asked my Obstetrician, about getting this he simply said that I was too old and it was not being offered to my age group yet. So what is classed as "too old"? What over 20's cannot get a vital vaccination, takes the piss. Jade Goody has it at 27, thats 6 years away-it could prevent me from getting it and having to put my child through that pain.
Reply 195
no, but i've had cervical cancer and after the surgery it will be highly unlikely that i will ever am able to get pregnant. if i do my chance of miscarriage or premature birth is very high and i will have to be on bed rest for the last few months. i only got married a year ago and found out when myhusband and i were trying for a baby. even though i was an early stage that didn't require a hysterectomy, i still lost 2/3 of my cervix and had my lymph nodes removed resulting in nerve damage to my legs that has given me pain and kept me relatively inactive for months.

if you are thinking about getting the injection but are not sure, do it. it has been 6 months of being scared and nervous and having a biopsy and then surgery and then being in pain for months. it has been hell and it wasn't even life threateningly serious.

although i think the vaccine is only for hpv and you don't have to have hpv to get the cancer (i didn't have it and still had cancer) so make sure you still get regular smears and such. but anything to help prevent cervical cancer is important.

benwellsday
the vaccine may be useful for a family history of cervical cancer..


and just fyi, there is no genetic link related to cervical cancer
benwellsday

My main point is that people shouldn't get there hopes up about this being a step towards a cancer vaccine. It should be good for people who are weak to HPV though, and I'm sure some types of genetical trait may put you at risk of having a weaker defense to HPV, and so in that respect the vaccine may be useful for a family history of cervical cancer. It's hard to say because I am neither a doctor, nor good at biology type things.

I can make it easy for you then because i am good at biology type things.

100% of cervical cancer is caused by HPV. If you had a perfect life long vaccine agaisnt all types of HPV that was given to everyone...then cervical cancer would cease to be.
jovana

although i think the vaccine is only for hpv and you don't have to have hpv to get the cancer (i didn't have it and still had cancer) so make sure you still get regular smears and such. but anything to help prevent cervical cancer is important.

You HAD had HPV. HPV to cervical cancer is almost like smoking with lung cancer.
It does the damage, makes the changes at a genetic level and then might get cleared. The damage is done. Same with smoking - you might say you are a non-smoker with lung cancer, but then when asked admit to a 40/day habit for 40 years which you stopped 3 weeks ago.

The difference is with lung cancer 12% of cancers are nothing to do with smoking. In cervical cancer the link is 100%. (or rather 99.98%)
Reply 198
Jamie


100% of cervical cancer is caused by HPV. If you had a perfect life long vaccine agaisnt all types of HPV that was given to everyone...then cervical cancer would cease to be.


And celibate womean don't get cervical cancer! :biggrin:
Reply 199
elziebelzie
no its way more than that... over £100 i think.


It is costing the government (tax payer, that is) £160 per dose (that's £480 per female), according to communications between the UK government and Scottish Parliament.

The UK government have kept the costs out of the public domain so we don't know how much it is costing, although conservative figures are over 2million 12-18 years old to be offered vaccination by 2011 so anyone with a calculator can estimate the costs.

But hey, if it improves the statistics of 1 in 100,000 women getting cervical cancer (thanks to our cervical screening programme) then it's worth it, yes?

Quick Reply

Latest