HPV vaccine effective in men
Full Story »
See All Reviews »
This article is well-written and provides information regarding health risks and benefits for both men and women in regard to HPV. It confronts stereotypes mainly in an unconscious way by a lot of the facts provided. It states that the vaccine has been approved for men since 2009 but has not been pushed as necessary or particularly important since the risks lie mainly with a woman’s health. However, the study shows that .5% of men that received the Gardisil vaccine got genital warts, strong evidence for the fact that men should get the vaccine. Further, the article states that men’s role is important in the prevention of these health risks especially since women are the ones that have to suffer if exposed to a man that has not been vaccinated. Therefore, although no stereotypes were directly addressed, the gap between responsibilities, risks, etc. between men and women is discussed in a manner in which it is unfortunate that society has not placed pressure on men to get vaccinated.
The article addresses several fault lines such as gender and class yet fails to discuss the influence or impact of geography and generation of this health issue. Gender is the most significant fault line within this issue because the article discusses the reasoning for pushing women to get the HPV vaccine and not men. It talks about how HPV is more of an immediate risk for women than for men since it can lead to cervical cancer while the consequences for men are slight in comparison. However, the article pushes for men’s inclusion in the pressure to receive the vaccine because it could lead to a “double benefit” in which the men are therefore protecting themselves as well as aiding in the prevention of passing the virus to a female partner. Class is also briefly addressed in that most health insurance plans are able to cover the vaccine for both men and women in case they are not able to afford it on their own. Additionally, the article provides information for those who cannot afford coverage or self-payment and can possibly be covered by the federal program, Vaccines for Children. The article, however, fails to include geography and generation as fault lines. Geography could significantly affect, for example, access to health care (i.e. a clinic that provides the vaccine). Also, generation would appear important to address in that the HPV vaccine is relatively new and particularly important for this generation since sexual promiscuity and activity has changed from generations before us. That information could have been helpful in that the increase of sexual activity especially at a younger age is another significant reason to push for the vaccine.
See All Reviews »