Opinion: Boys and the cervical-cancer vaccine

This article was originally on a blog post platform and may be missing photos, graphics or links. See About archive blog posts.

From the start of the buzz about Gardasil, the vaccine that guards against the two most common forms of the virus that can cause cervical cancer, I’ve wondered why public health officials were concerned only about vaccinating girls. Wouldn’t society be better protected if the boys were vaccinated, too?

As it turns out, the Food and Drug Administration recently wondered too. An FDA panel recommended the vaccine for boys -- but then a study out of the Harvard School of Public health found that this wouldn’t be cost-effective. It all has to do with a complex formula, described this way by HealthDay News:

Vaccination was considered a good value if cost-effectiveness ratios ranged from $50,000 to $100,000 per quality-adjusted life year, meaning the cost of the vaccine vs. the number of added years someone would gain by getting the vaccine.
Other experts say Harvard failed to take some factors into account that make it worthwhile to vaccinate boys. then of course there are parents who worry about giving their daughters a new vaccine. In any case, not all girls are vaccinated and women and older girls who move here from other nations also might not be protected. I certainly understand the need to figure out cost-effectiveness, but wonder how others are feeling about Gardasil.’

-- Karin Klein