1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

More bad news

Discussion in 'General Discussion Forum' started by ManlyBacker, May 11, 2007.

  1. ManlyBacker

    ManlyBacker Winging it Staff Member

    +972 /7
    Increase in cancer rates linked to oral sex

    Rob Stein in Washington
    May 11, 2007

    THE sexually transmitted virus that causes cervical cancer also sharply increases the risk of throat cancer among people infected through oral sex, a new study says.

    The study, involving 300 subjects with and without throat cancer, found that those infected with the human papillomavirus (HPV) were 32 times more likely to develop one form of oral cancer than those free of the virus. Although previous research had indicated that the virus caused oral cancer, the new study is the first to definitively establish the link, researchers said.

    "It makes it absolutely clear that oral HPV infection is a risk factor," said Maura Gillison, an assistant professor of oncology and epidemiology at the Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions in Baltimore, who led the study published yesterday in The New England Journal of Medicine.

    The findings could help explain why oral cancer rates have been increasing in recent years, particularly among younger people and those who are not smokers or heavy drinkers, which had long been the primary at-risk groups, experts said.

    "There's been a kind of sea change in the last 10 years in who we're seeing with these cancers," Dr Gillison said. "It makes sense with some changes we've seen in sexual behaviour."

    The findings provide new evidence that oral sex is not safe sex.

    "Many adolescents, and adults too, say they engage in oral sex as a less risky type of sex," said Mark Schuster of the University of California, Los Angeles, noting that herpes, syphilis, gonorrhoea, HIV and other sexually transmitted infections also spread through oral sex. "What this article and others show is you absolutely can get serious sexually transmitted diseases through oral sex."

    The findings could also provide new ammunition for those advocating wide use of a new vaccine that protects against HPV. Even though the vaccine has not been tested specifically to see if it reduces the risk of oral cancer, it is designed to protect against the type of HPV associated with the malignancy.

    "This adds more data that HPV is an important cause of cancer and that this is an important vaccine," said Joseph Bocchini, who chairs the American Academy of Pediatrics's committee on infectious diseases.

    The type of oral cancer linked to HPV strikes about 11,000 Americans a year. This is about the same as the number of women diagnosed with cervical cancer.

    It could also spur calls to vaccinate both boys and girls because oral cancer strikes both.

    Proponents of the vaccine have been advocating mandatory vaccination of girls. But opponents say the vaccine may encourage sexual activity and that the vaccine is too new to be sure that it is safe and its effectiveness is long lasting. They argue that the decision should be left to individual parents.

    In the study, regardless of whether they were infected, anyone who had had between one and five oral sex partners was 3.8 times more likely to have the cancer, whereas those who had had more than six oral sex partners were 8.6 times more likely.

    It remains unclear whether kissing someone who is HPV-positive poses any risks.
  2. Fro

    Fro Well-Known Member

    +301 /0
    My Missus won't get it :)
  3. Matabele

    Matabele Well-Known Member

    +516 /14
    Willo is in trouble then.
  4. Dan

    Dan Kim Jong Dan Staff Member Administrator 2016 Tipping Competitor 2017 Tipping Competitor

    +7,736 /120
    meh its a risk I am willing to take :)
  5. ManlyBacker

    ManlyBacker Winging it Staff Member

    +972 /7
    Onya Dan.

    I always notice that alarmist press of a medical kind never says what percentage of the population gets cervical cancer in a particular year. It makes it very hard to assess the risk. I mean 8.6 times more likely than what?
  6. clontaago

    clontaago Well-Known Member

    +170 /1
    Just dont swallow Dan
  7. Nutzcraw

    Nutzcraw Active Member

    +4 /0
    I haven't had any action in a while now actually.. so i'm sweet.

Share This Page