Talk:HPV vaccine

This
This is an import from CP. There was quite a vigorous discussion there, as Ashfly threw around baseless accusations.--PalMD-yada yada 21:50, 18 June 2007 (CDT)

"A study published February 28, 2007 in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) [4] disclosed that about 3% of women are infected in their lifetime by the particular types of HPV (Types 6, 11, 16, 18) targeted by the vaccine." This is inaccurate, and makes the same mistake as Conservapedia.

The JAMA article looked at PREVALENCE of infection, not lifetime INCIDENCE. HPV types 6,11,16 and 18 were identified in 3.4% at the time of the study. Most HPV infections resolve spontaneously after a period of months or years. The lifetime incidence is much, much greater than the numbers who have the infection at any one time. --Snout 20:21, 25 April 2008 (EDT)

MSM going against vaccine now?
This story came up in last night's CBS Evening News. It was the story of one girl who got very sick after getting this vaccine, but I doubt that it's reflective of the general effects given that it cites the National Vaccine Information Center, which I've heard advances the "vaccine/autism" rumors.

I've seen "liberal media" outlets being skeptical of the vaccine now, such as ABC World News and Telegraph. Thoughts? --AP 13:32, 7 February 2009 (EST)

Updating article
Most of these references are out of date- with the CDC now recommending the vaccine for boys, we ought to bring it up to date. DogP (talk) 05:38, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Updating article (2021)
I don't want to turn the page into a debunking FAQ as this lovely article does the job excellently, maybe I'll add one little section about the erroneous conclusions that the vaccine causes ovarian failure and autoimmune diseases but nothing more. I am contemplating expanding this article by adding historical section which discusses anti-vaccination resistance to the HPV vaccine--it honestly was tantamount a quasi-MMR vaccine scare. --April 22:21, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
 * For what it's worth, I think those additions all sound great. 22:50, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Alright. Also, is it alright to put in citations that reference crank stories? I'm gathering up some resources for the section on the history of HPV vaccine denialism and I want to make sure that sourcing Fox News or whatever wouldn't break a rule on the wiki. I'd only cite Fox News to make sure it doesn't seem like I'm making up the erroneous accusations right-wingers created.--April 17:39, 19 June 2021 (UTC)

In summary
I originally wanted to dive into the history of HPV vaccine denialism, but I fear that I would make the page redundant; I already debunked most of the myths surrounding the jab that I could find. So, I think I'm finished with this project for now. Albeit, the citations aren't formatted correctly, which agitates me enough that I might try and fix those when I get the opportunity. Plus, I beg of you, spare me from having to delve into an immeasurable amount of sensationalized articles painting the vaccine as the antichrist. If the page is terrible, don't mind breaking it to me; I'm sub-par at writing these articles.~April 19:45, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Hey, we appreciate the work you did. It's missional enough, considering both the moral panic and anti-vax hysteria.  20:29, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
 * I also like your work on this page. GeeJayK (talk) 20:33, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
 * I gave it a bronze rating. Anyone object to the bronze brain?  20:39, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Oh my...thank you! I'm glad I was able to expound upon this page.~April 1:55, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Untitled
I sincerely apologize for using poor grammar whilst writing this article, I'll try to further mend the page if need be.--A p r i l Chat? 03:52, 5 September 2021 (UTC)
 * For the love of Christ. How many times did I use the passive tone in this article?-A p r i l Chat? 20:04, 17 May 2022 (UTC)