3 ms·
I apologize for the ambiguity of my prior comment. To illustrate what I'm thinking: Suppose cervical cancer is caused by two strains, 1 and 2, which are equally
by tedsanders 9y ago
I apologize for the ambiguity of my prior comment. To illustrate what I'm thinking: Suppose cervical cancer is caused by two strains, 1 and 2, which are equally present in the population. A vaccine works 100% against strain 1 and 0% against strain 2. That vaccine is 50% effective against all strains causing cancer, despite having 0 power to eradicate strain 2.
Therefore, it's not clear to me that being 'semi-effective against all strains' implies 'semi-effective against each strain.'
I am now looking for sources that say Gardasil is semi-effective against each strain of HPV.
Edit: Reading this source[1] I see that Gardasil protects against strains 31/33/45/51 (grouped) with 33%-51% effectiveness. Still can't find conclusive evidence that Gardasil protects against each strain.
[1] http://cvi.asm.org/content/early/2015/01/29/CVI.00591-14.full.pdf+html http://cvi.asm.org/content/early/2015/01/29/CVI.00591-14.ful...
- nostrademons 9y agoI would assume that the context ("already provide some protection against additional strains of HPV") implies that it provides additional protection against additional, individual strains, but will grant that the wording doesn't conclusively say that and alternate interpretations are possible.
- tedsanders 9y agoAgreed. From the evidence I was able to find, certainly Gardasil seems to prevent at least some closely related strains. I am wondering if it prevents all cancer-causing strains though, which would be needed for eradication. Probably, given the title of the article, but I wish I could find a primary or secondary source.