[HN Gopher] Cervical Cancer incidence drops 65% in women who ben...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Cervical Cancer incidence drops 65% in women who benefited from HPV
       vaccine
        
       Author : Anon84
       Score  : 79 points
       Date   : 2024-01-22 17:46 UTC (5 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.nbcnews.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.nbcnews.com)
        
       | jonathankoren wrote:
       | A huge health win, that was opposed by the religious right
       | because preventing cervical cancer encourages teen sex. This is
       | 13 years ago. The very women the GOP was arguing shouldn't get
       | vaccinated while campaigning for president.
       | 
       | Elections matter.
       | 
       | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1800969/
        
         | nerpderp82 wrote:
         | How many extra dead women from cervical cancer did the Bush
         | administration kill? I can't do math right now.
         | 
         | *edit, why would you downvote that?
         | 
         | https://www.cdc.gov/cancer/cervical/statistics/index.htm
         | 
         | https://seer.cancer.gov/statfacts/html/cervix.html
         | 
         | About 4k women die each year from cervical cancer.
        
         | pstuart wrote:
         | The fact that vaccines have become politicized is testament to
         | how off the rails things have gone. There's other subjects too,
         | but vaccines had bipartisan support until _recently_.
        
           | mistermann wrote:
           | If people antagonize their outgroup members excessively, it
           | can turn disagreement into total war.
           | 
           | https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/09/30/i-can-tolerate-
           | anythin...
           | 
           | "It shouldn't be this way"...
           | 
           | https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/7374580-frodo-it-s-a-
           | pity-b...
        
             | jonathankoren wrote:
             | Of course this live and let live approach completely breaks
             | down when you need a critical mass of collective action to
             | prevent collective harm.
             | 
             | Vaccine refusal is quantitatively antisocial behavior. It
             | isn't a personal choice. It endangers everyone. This is
             | scientific fact.
        
               | mistermann wrote:
               | I'm not suggesting "live and let live", I am suggesting
               | we approach the topic _seriously_ - and if one is
               | serious, one takes into consideration _causality_ (that
               | which causes things to happen as they do, which is
               | sometimes other than _how it seems_ ).
               | 
               | Everyone likes to privilege their ingroup's form of
               | unseriousness, but that doesn't make the consequences
               | vanish.
        
             | nerpderp82 wrote:
             | This shifts the blame away from where it ultimately lies.
             | Being right politically has always meant anti-intellectual.
             | The act of using scientific evidence to support a position
             | in and of itself gives them justification to fight it.
             | 
             | This is victim blaming. I do not mock or humiliate the
             | uninformed, but we cannot meet in the middle to coddle
             | malicious ignorance.
        
               | mistermann wrote:
               | > This shifts the blame away from where it ultimately
               | lies.
               | 
               | Do you state this as an objective fact regarding
               | causality, or are you more so describing the norms of the
               | (sub-)culture you were raised in, _perhaps without
               | serious scrutiny_?
               | 
               | If the former, then I would expect there to be some sort
               | of a widely agreed upon proof you could link to.
               | 
               | > Being right politically has always meant anti-
               | intellectual.
               | 
               | Are you genuinely serious when you say this?
               | 
               | > This is victim blaming. I do not mock or humiliate the
               | uninformed, but we cannot meet in the middle to coddle
               | malicious ignorance.
               | 
               | You overlook nothing?
               | 
               | And if I happen to know you are overlooking something,
               | does it follow that me being rude to you _necessarily_
               | has no negative consequences?
               | 
               | To what degree should death be taken seriously? Seriously
               | enough that _everyone_ should question their faith, or
               | only some people ( _coincidentally_...)?
        
               | rswskg wrote:
               | As the left has gone full blown science denial now, I
               | don't think that angle works anymore
        
         | ddgflorida wrote:
         | What was opposed was forced vaccines on teens using a new
         | vaccine. Our own family doctor recommended we wait until a few
         | years had passed. A few years later - we got the
         | recommendation.
        
           | seattle_spring wrote:
           | > What was opposed was forced vaccines on teens using a new
           | vaccine
           | 
           | Maybe in part, but there was a very large contingency that
           | outright opposed it due to its perceived encouragement of
           | "amoral" behavior. Exact same thing is happening now in the
           | courts with Mifeprestone.
        
       | electrondood wrote:
       | In case anyone here knows someone with high-risk HPV who was too
       | old to benefit from these vaccines... this is my favorite medical
       | study: a combination of Reishi and turkey tail mushrooms boost
       | the body's clearance rate from 5% to 88% in a 2-month period [0].
       | 
       | I firmly believe this would have been 100% if they'd continued
       | past 2 months.
       | 
       | A friend of mine had a positive pap test for high-risk HPV, and I
       | sent her this study. She started on this combo of mushrooms and
       | at her followup the next month she was clear.
       | 
       | [0] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25271984/
        
         | huytersd wrote:
         | Is 5-88% the range or progression?
        
           | reaperman wrote:
           | HPV was "cured" (cleared) by the human body itself within 2
           | months in 5% of the control subjects (n=20) and in 88% of the
           | test group (n=41).
           | 
           | https://sci-hub.ru/10.1615/intjmedmushrooms.v16.i5.80
        
             | kmonad wrote:
             | The abstract indicates that there was no control group
             | without treatment, but two groups given two different
             | mushroom combos. As such, the "baseline" clearance is not
             | revealed by this work.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-01-22 23:02 UTC)