Thanks for keeping the woman + sex = skank meme alive. If only in my lifetime I could see this idea banished completely I'd die a satisified woman.

And for the record, you don't have to actually have warts present to spread the virus. Some strains don't produce them and a lot of the ones that do don't lead to cancer. So you've probably been a carrier at some point in your life as well and never knew it. So cut the misogynistic crap now, please, or stop having sex with women altogether.

How the hell are they going to know you had sex? Hymens are typically gone long before sex these days, and honestly, if I wanted the vaccine and knew about this ridiculous rule, I'd lie my ass off.

I'm not sure why it's not approved for women over 26, but I'd bet that it's based on the ages of the women involved in the safety and efficacy studies. Merck is currently conducting efficacy studies on women up to age 45.

This is a quote from the SF Chronicle article today about this subject:

"The federal advisory panel recommended that all women up to age 26 be vaccinated against the virus, though it is still unclear whether the vaccine is effective in women who have been exposed to the virus. Kaiser said it will not cover the vaccine for women who already have had sex."

Read that last sentence again. Kaiser plans to check your virginity before paying up for the shot that will save them money by trying to prevent you from getting cervical cancer. It doesn't matter that you don't have HPV and would like to try not to get it - if you've had sex, you have to pay for those shots yourself. The federal advisory panel says women up to age 26 (why that age? Is there some magic about that, that you can't get HPV after that age?) should get the shot, so why is Kaiser refusing to pay for it if you're an adult woman who's had sex but hasn't (yet) contracted the virus?

SHAMEFUL.

Sigh...

I know I should be happy that the vaccine is here, but the way that it's being presented in the media is like a cheese grater against my head.

Four thousand women dying of cervical cancer a year is tragic, but why is there no mention of the millions and millions of women who don't get cancer, but instead spend up to two years of their lives with visible, contagious, itchy, painful, "cauliflower shaped" genital warts?

In my 18-22 year old university student social circle, HPV is just as epidemic as the statistics would have you believe. If you haven't had it yet, you're a virgin. We suffer through painful treatments, get emotionally shut out by girl/boyfriends who suddenly see us contagious rather than sexy, and hate our bodies even more. For the year my HPV was active, I gave a whole lot of anonymous head and wouldn't let anyone touch me below the waist. In a burst of frustration, I cut the most visible warts off with a cooking knife.

I would want my future daughter to have the vaccine to spare her from cancer, but first and foremost to save her from the terrifying, stigmatized, and traumatic experience of having a visible sexually transmitted disease. Why can't we be celebrating the decrease in secret visits to the doctor and running to the bathroom to itch bloody genital warts as well?

I don't understand the argument that vaccinating 11 and 12 year olds against HPV will promote promiscuity. As a kid, I didn't have any idea what vaccinations I was receiving - I was just taken to the doctor and given a shot with the promise of one of those little dum-dum suckers afterward. My dad was my doctor - if any kid would've felt comfortable asking, "Hey, what's that you're giving me? What's it for?" that would've been me.

Those who are really worried that the knowledge of a vaccination against a disease which the kids have probably never heard of before will somehow promote promiscuity, when other much more commonly-known risks, such as pregnancy and AIDS, still exist... well, just don't tell your kids what that shot is for. Or, go ahead, tell them it will help prevent a form of cancer. That's not exactly going to make them think, "Oh, hey, I can sleep around now with no consequences!"

Considering all women under 45 as "pre-pregnant," and recommending that they follow some basic health and diet guidelines to ensure that they stay healthy?

I guess we are considering all 12- and 13-year-old girls as pre-skank-who-have-sex-with-guys-with-warts-on-their-dicks.

you vaccinate them to keep them from spreading the wart virus to girls and giving them cancer. I just came back from my professional society, Society for Epidemiologic Research, and as you might imagine this was a hot topic. While we weren't in complete consensus, most of the epidemiologists felt vaccine campaigns should vaccinate those who spread the disease as much or more than those at risk.

A good exmaple is the current and miserably ineffective CDC policy on flu vaccination, ie, you protect those most at risk of serious health problems if they catch flu. Sounds good, but doesn't work - those people often don't have good immune response, and even if they do, can get overwhelmed by a large dose of virus during peak flu outbreaks. Many at the meeting espoused vaccinating the spreaders first and most - and those are little kids, preschool and elementary age youngsters. Where it's been tried, it's worked much better than the CDC policy at keeping oldsters and infants healthy.

That kids age 13 who are sexually active are assaulted.

I spent my eighth grade year (in 1980) as a friend became more and more visibly pregnant. The father was my brother's friend down the street (age 14). It happens. She "went to her grandma's" for the summer, and came back to start high school considerably slimmer.

No, it's certainly not ideal, and not the way any 13 year old wants to learn about birth control. But it happens, and it's not always because of assault.