Thanks for your willingness to serve as a study subject. But don't blow it by being vaccinated without first checking with the researchers. Getting the vaccine probably will interfere with the research. Even if you don't tell them, they will know: the antibody levels against HPV 16 are far higher after the vaccine than after natural infection.
In response to the comment by pcrguy, my guess is that you have already been tested as part of the research study. But if not, his question is pertinent. Do you know for sure? How?
Best wishes-- HHH, MD
May I ask, how do you know you are infected with HPV 16? My understanding is there is no available test for men. Thanks.
Why don't you ask the person conducting the study?
I think I misspoke. I meant to say: in future, if I were to participate in a research that follows up a person's serology clearance and manifestation of disease.
I am interested in getting Gardasil because I heard from physicians there might still be some benefit to people who are infected (despite the public announcement that it is only preventive and not therapeutic). Though Gardasil does not improve rate of clearance, Gardasil could prevent future malignancy for people already infected. What is your opinion on this?
Secondly, if antibody could not serve as an assessment tool, couldn't they follow the viral load of HPV 16 for evidence of clearance?
Thanks for your help.
Gardasil has no effect whatsoever on established HPV infection. It does not prevent future malignancy in people who already have HIV. Where on earth did you hear that?
Tests for antibody and viral load are completely different tests.
Any idea on the effectiveness of Gardasil after the second shot? Obviously, ideal would be after the full round, but do you think there is ANY effectiveness after the second shot of Gardasil?
I got a little excited after reading this about Gardasil possible therapeutic value.
"For those already infected, the clinical trials suggested the (Gardasil) vaccine can cut the onset of pre-cancerous lesions, though the 27 per cent reduction achieved doesn't technically qualify for the rigid statistical nod of approval. "
Gardasil has no therapeutic value, and the article you quote doesn't say that it does. The supposed 27% reduction refers to the impact on all HPV types. For those covered by the vaccine, the protection is 100%; but there are many other types out there. However, most of them are not associated with either cancer or warts, so they don't matter--they have no health implicaitons.
Most likely there is at least partial protection after the second shot. But everybody for sure should have the third dose.
A related discussion, gardasil side effects ?