Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Tuesday March 06 2018, @06:58PM   Printer-friendly
from the still-have-a-long-way-to-go dept.

Naaman Zhou at The Guardian writes that Australia's free human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination programme in schools has been highly successful. The International Papillomavirus Society calculates that within 40 years, the number of new cases of cervical cancer will become nearly negligible.

HPV (human papillomavirus) is a sexually transmitted infection that causes 99.9% of cervical cancers. In 2007, the federal government began providing the vaccine for free to girls aged 12-13 years, and in 2013, it extended the program to boys.

Girls and boys outside those ages but under 19 can also access two doses of the vaccine for free. In 2016, 78.6% of 15-year old girls and 72.9% of 15-year old boys had been vaccinated.

As a result, the HPV rate among women aged 18 to 24 dropped from 22.7% to 1.1% between 2005 and 2015.

Eradication is still a few decades out but within reach. The vaccinations are backed up by more advanced cervical screening tests, which are themselves highly successful in detecting high-risk HPV infections before they turn really bad.

Source : Australia could become first country to eradicate cervical cancer. The Guardian


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by HiThere on Wednesday March 07 2018, @06:59AM

    by HiThere (866) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday March 07 2018, @06:59AM (#648910) Journal

    I'm sorry, but "VLM"?? What does that mean? I also don't recognize either "RINOs" or "cucks".

    FWIW, I don't consider the US right wing to be conservative. They aren't even reactionary. "Jingoist" could be defensible.

    A conservative is one who wishes to conserve whatever they thing is good about the current situation, so those defending their right to purchase guns could fairly be called conservative *on that issue*. They're trying to conserve what they consider good about the current situation. But on most other issues the term conservative is wildly inappropriate.

    Now to go back to what I said, some conservative are like their caricatures. I'm not talking about the general run of right wing spokesmen, who seem to either be unable to express whatever their actual goals are coherently, or to actually have an incoherent set of goals. (I'm talking about individuals. For a category of people to have incoherent goals is only to be expected.) This is sort of the way the spokesmen of the left were like back when they were pushing "coalition politics" without bothering to get an agreement about just what they intended to include. So the spokesmen would just say any garbage that they thought sounded like it might be attractive to *some* potential supporters. Bob Wilson satirized this in Schroedinger's Cat as the Necrophile Liberation Front and the Foot Fetishist Liberation Front. But the current crop of right wing politicians are a bit difficult to satirize.

    --
    Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2