A study published late last week in the Journal of Clinical Oncology reported that the human papillomavirus (HPV) — which causes cervical cancer in women — is becoming a leading cause of oral cancer in men. According to one of the study’s authors, during the next 10 years HPV will probably pass tobacco and alcohol to become the number one cause of these cancers.
As you probably know, there’s a vaccine against a group of the most common strains of HPV. The FDA approved its use for girls and young women in 2006. And this new information about men and oral cancer prompts the question: should we be thinking about giving the vaccine to boys, as well?
The are two parts to that question, one scientific and the other cultural.
First, the science: researchers don’t actually know if the HPV vaccine can protect men against oral and genital cancers. Apparently there is some research into this angle and presumably an answer should (maybe, probably, eventually) surface.
That brings us to the cultural part of all this. After the HPV vaccine gained approval, Merck — the company behind the vaccine — started pushing for states to mandate that girls get the shot. The push has garnered a lot of resistance, in part because of concern among cultural conservatives that giving girls a vaccine against a sexually transmitted infection might somehow encourage them to have sex. That concern seemed to contain a certain amount of general uneasiness about daughters and sex — almost a “You want to vaccinate my daughter against an infection she can get by doing what? I’M NOT LISTENING I’M NOT LISTENING I’M NOT LISTENING” response.
Now that the focus is shifting towards sons, it will be interesting to see how people react. Will the concerns about promoting promiscuity still hold if boys are in line to get the jab? And if not, will that make people re-think their earlier objection?
-Greg Dahlmann
Earlier on blog.bioethics.net:
+ Glenn McGee in The Scientist: How Much Should Gardasil Cost?