Despite the fact that I'm too old, my doctor has consented to administer the HPV vaccine!
I was in her office for a scheduled appointment for another matter when I asked her whether there was any possibility of giving me the vaccine. She said we'd need to schedule another appointment to discuss my risk factors, so I did so. That appointment was today. She asked me about whether I've had abnormal pap smears and about my sexual history, and in light of the information acquired there said that she could allow me to have it. Then she brought up the fact that my future risk of acquiring HPV is low, so is the vaccine really necessary. I asked what specific risks there were to taking this vaccine, and she said that there were none that they know of (apart from the usual potential for your body reacting to the vaccine) but long-term effects are still unknown. She didn't have anything specific to warn me about and didn't seem to be trying to dissuade me, she just seemed to be making sure I had all the information. It felt like she was leaving the decision up to me.
So I decided to do it, she gave me the prescription, and I will be getting my first shot in early May.
I'm not going into detail about my personal risk factors, because I don't know how different risk factors would affect one's chances of getting the vaccine. That's really something to talk to your doctor about.
So how do you get in to talk to your doctor? (If you haven't been following my saga, that was the first problem - I'd been trying since last August but couldn't get past the receptionist because she'd never heard of it.) If you're having the same problems as me, don't ask the receptionist about the HPV vaccine or Gardasil or the cervical cancer vaccine, just get into the doctor's examining room by whatever means necessary, and then ask the doctor there. I know it's considered necessary to tell the receptionist why you need the appointment, but if that doesn't work the receptionist's attitude isn't necessarily the same as the doctor's. I was just completely unprepared for the receptionist not knowing what I was talking about and then limiting her actions based on her own knowledge.
3 comments:
I'm really happy that you pushed this as far as you did. It would have been very easy for you to resign to the easier path. Good for you. I hope you blaze a trail for many other women in Canada.
Not to pry into your personal life too far, but I'm going to guess that you won't become more promiscuous as a result of the vaccine. Apparently, the vaccine is a gateway drug to twelve-year-old promiscuity, so... um, it's really kind of stupid, isn't it?
Even if it were a gateway for promiscuity...
I first heard of HPV (and why it's scarier than your average STD) in 1999 or 2000. I first read about it on Salon of all places when I was in first year university. It wasn't in my sex ed book (published in the early 90s) or in my sex ed classes in school, both of which were very thorough about STDs. So I established my standards for promiscuity or lack thereof without any knowledge of HPV, and had already begun to live in accordance with those standards before I heard of HPV. I'd suspect the same is true for most, if not all, women my age and older. So the vaccine isn't a factor in my decision-making because I'd already made those decisions before I heard of the vaccine, or even HPV itself.
Younger girls - the 9-12 year olds that people are so squeamish about vaccinating - they've always known about HPV and the vaccine will have always been available during their sexually-aware lives. So their decision-making is going to take this into account, whether they're vaccinated right now or not. If this is an important factor to them, they'll decide "Well, I'll just get the vaccine before I become sexually active," like how my 12-year-old self, (who still thought boys were yucky) decided "I'll just go on the Pill before I become sexually active."
So the only people for whom there's even a possibility of the vaccine making a difference in sexual behaviour is people who, between 2000 and 2006, had decided on what their standards for protection and sexual behaviour were, but hadn't yet begun to put those standards into action. That's not a huge subset of the general population. And then of this subset, there's the question of for how many people HPV is actually a deciding factor that would change their behaviour.
So that would be people in this small age group who look at the possibility of pregnancy and decide it's an acceptable risk, look at the possibility of HIV and decide it's an acceptable risk, look at the possibility of herpes and decide it's an acceptable risk, look at the possibility of the minor curable STDs and decide it's an acceptable risk, look at any cultural or religious restrictions they might have on promiscuous behaviour and decide it's an acceptable risk, and then look at HPV and decide it's not an acceptable risk.
That's such a small portion of the population that even if those fears were founded, the overall effect would be negligible.
Good job, and good post.
I had HPV in my 20s. It was not particularly scary, but if there had been a vaccine, I'd rather have had that.
PS The modern term for "promiscuity or lack thereof" is "sexual activity".
Post a Comment