this post was submitted on 24 Apr 2026
210 points (99.1% liked)

science

26710 readers
1046 users here now

A community to post scientific articles, news, and civil discussion.

dart board;; science bs

rule #1: be kind

lemmy.world rules

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 47 points 15 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago) (2 children)

First they say we don't need it, then they say we're too old for it, and finally they say it's beneficial.

Is this a game to you?

[–] partial_accumen@lemmy.world 32 points 14 hours ago (2 children)

TLDR; whether you are male or female if you are under the age of 45, and insurance will pay for it, get the HPV vaccine. They won't let you have it over 45 years old.

Firs they say we don’t need it,

When it initially came out supplies were low and the only known at-risk groups it was know to help directly were girls and young women, so they said, rightfully, men don't need it at this time.

then they say we’re too old for it

Because at the time time it was thought that if you got one of the non-threatening strains of HPV that your body would already be primed to fight of a future infection of one of the few threatening strains. With nearly any vaccine there's a negligible amount of health risks. If the research at the time said that there'd be no benefit to you, but you'd still be exposed to the negligible risk, then it made sense to say you were too old to benefit.

There's also a money thing here. The HPV vaccine isn't particularly cheap. So the guidance is trying to save you from throwing money away. If you need it, the cost is well worth it, if it wouldn't benefit you, the money paid for it would be wasted.

then they say we’re too old for it, and finally they say it’s beneficial.

Years passed with outcomes showing benefits for other not in the primary group of recipients (girls and young women). So, yes, now they're telling you they have evidence that its helpful to you too.

[–] Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 1 points 4 hours ago

its like several hundred for out of pocket for shingrx for under 50year old. gardisil is not likely cheap other.

[–] dontgogettingtooclever@piefed.social 4 points 13 hours ago (3 children)

what happens if someone over 45 gets the vaccine?

[–] leoj@piefed.social 7 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago)

I don't see anything that indicates danger according to the american cancer society, according to them it is entirely cost benefit although they do admit it has not been thoroughly studied in populations 45+.

Having multiple sex partners, or recently divorced is an indication for getting it though - so if you're a big 'ol slut (<3) you should consider it at any age, if you can get it paid for.

[–] partial_accumen@lemmy.world 3 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago) (1 children)

A pharmacist is perhaps in trouble for not following regulations? They set these rules because they've done studies about adverse effects, and those trials apparently only included folks up to age 45, so they don't know for sure what would happen to older people. Its the same reason most people can't get the Shingles vaccine until age 50 (even though LOTS of people under 50 get Shingles). The clinical data starts at 50 for that one.

You're not going to die or anything, but the rules are in place they won't give it to you so I recommend getting it while you can as it is clearly showing benefits over time. I got HPV shot before I aged out and it was completely paid for by insurance (because of the USA ACA).

[–] Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 1 points 4 hours ago

i saw so many people on the shingles sub trying to get it, even though they arnt at risk. also the implications is unknown, and someone reported they actually had a really bad inflammatory reaction from taking shingles vaccine so early in life.

[–] driving_crooner@lemmy.eco.br 17 points 15 hours ago

Medical recommendations changed based on recent studies. What a concept!