foodconsumer.org: Gardasil for Boys Deemed Fiscally Imprudent

Gardasil for Boys Deemed Fiscally Imprudent
================================================================================
admin on 10/11/2009 01:07:00
 
By Rachel Howell  Stockton
For the last  several weeks the FDA has been pondering whether or not giving
boys the Gardasil  vaccine would be a cost effective endeavor.  So far, the
bottom line is showing that  doing so wouldn’t be fiscally prudent.
The CDC now  recommends that pre-adolescent girls be routinely vaccinated with
Gardisil,  which wards off the human papillomavirus.  Several strains of HPV can
lead to cervical cancer in young women, and  genital warts in men.  Girls from 
age 13-26 who have not been immunized are also encouraged to become  vaccinated.
Recently, it  was determined that giving the vaccine to boys offers a high
degree of  protection from HPV.  However,  because girls are being urged to
become immunized, vaccinating boys appears to  be somewhat redundant, cost wise.
The  repercussion of HPV in males is simply that they can pass it on to all of
their  female sexual partners.  And  cervical cancer is not the only health
issue related to the virus; HPV can  also cause pelvic inflammatory disease and
infertility. Clearly, the health risks for women are  greater than they are for
men.
The  cost-effectiveness debate could ultimately change; the researchers behind
the  study proceeded with their analysis based on the assumption that 75% of
young  women will eventually become vaccinated.  If that percentage ends up
being significantly lower, the prudence of  having boys routinely vaccinated
will, of course, be re-evaluated.