Papilloma virus is associated with cervical cancer. That same virus has also been mentioned with regard to oral cancer. Significantly, the virus shares some genetic sequences with the human genome--see journal reference at lower left.
In late 2005 a proposed vaccine for the two most common forms of cervical cancer was announced. One problem with such a vaccine could be that, in the production of sperm, meiosis will always creating new papilloma strains.
That is, I think the latent papilloma sequences in human sperm DNA might sometimes generate active viruses. I have a similar view regarding HIV. In my opinion both HPV and HIV are possibly generated in significant quantities from human sperm cells--although, if that's true, both viruses can also multiply by other means.
That is, viruses can be created, de novo, so to speak, by meiosis and then also spread in the ways that are now generally acknowledged. If that's true, then when HPV or HIV is produced by meiosis, it may be more heterogeneous and therefore more virulent than when produced by asexual reproduction. Asexual reporduction usually produces exact copies, which, by definition, are homogeneous, not hererogeneous. Any reader who's interested is referred to the other articles of mine regarding HIV for a more complete discussion.
My view--admittedly not conventional wisdom--hasn't so much been refuted by virologists as it's been treated as taboo. (You know, sometimes even those highly educated medical people can be shy and can be reluctant to talk about embarassing subjects such as "S-E-X.")
Women who became more confident of the safety of birth control pills--because of the new vaccine�and who then became more active sexually--as a result of that increased confidence--were then perhaps more likely to become infected by papilloma strains not protected against by the vaccine.
But how many women were even aware of the fact, currently certified by the ACS, that using birth control pills couldl increase the risk of cervical cancer?
Not many.
My experience was that IU researchers were unresponsive to the birth control pills/cervical cancer issue. That was so even though my concerns were based in part on a journal paper co-authored by two IU faculty members.
That�s an example of a scientific fact that's been minimized, perhaps in part because said fact doesn�t fit neatly with the desire to achieve certain goals seen as desirable. Examples might be goals of reducing population growth and reducing teen pregnancy. While those goals are sensible, it should also be noted that a significant fact isn't being made known to the very portion of the public whose health could be most at risk through ignorance of said fact.
Young women are entitled to make up their own minds about r reproductive issues. But I think they're also entitled to have all information relevant to the decisions that they need to make.
CONTINUE
Tom F. Hrisomalos, Denise L. Boggs, and Kenneth H. Fife; Journal of Virology, October 1990, page 5188.
The best way to find this reference may be through bound journal copies in the libraries of larger universities and medical schools. One author, Kenneth Fife was on the faculty of the Indiana University Medical School in Indianapolis at the time of this writing.