No Human Papillomavirus Type Replacement After HPV Vaccination?

[SaneVax: Science Daily recently published an article on a large scale study that headlined HPV types do not replace those suppressed via vaccination. Unfortunately, if you read the article carefully, it clearly states that all of the data for this ‘study’ came from an unvaccinated population. Anyone with half a brain cell left knows you cannot take data from an unvaccinated population to prove HPV type replacement does not occur after vaccination.

Will anyone read the article thoroughly? Or will they simply cite the article for the title and go on about the business of propagating what may be a dangerous myth? Is it any wonder the public has little confidence in their current health authorities?]

Human Papillomavirus types do not replace others after large-scale vaccination

No type replacement?
Show us some real data after vaccination!

ScienceDaily (July 24, 2012) — Vaccines against human papillomavirus (HPV) are now recommended by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for both teenage boys and girls. The vaccine protects against the two most common types of the virus that cause cervical cancer: HPV 16 and 18. Is there a chance that the increased number of people vaccinated might result in an increase of other types of HPV that cause cancer?

A UNC-led international team of scientists studied this question in a group of 2228 Kenyan men as a “nested” trial in a larger trial. Their first paper in the Journal of Infectious Diseases showed that little evidence exists for potential HPV type competition in a cross-sectional study. Viral type competition occurs when different types of a particular virus compete for dominance.


 “We found no evidence for competition between different HPV types over time in high-risk men from Kenya. While these data are based only on non-vaccinated men,…”

Read the entire article here.


  1. Mindanoiha says:

    Yet another misleading study which is probably intended for naïve doctors to gain credits for their “further education” courses.

    It is grossly inappropriate that the wrong target group was chosen for the study. The title “Human Papillomavirus Types Do Not Replace Others After Large-Scale Vaccination” is misleading and does not bear relation to the study. This is extremely unethical. The study belongs in the trash bin.

    The intention of the study is no doubt to convince doctors that HPV replacement does not occur. A basic principle in virology is that nature never leaves a void.

    Quotes from the study which is wishful thinking and lacks seriousness:
    “Their first paper in the Journal of Infectious Diseases showed that little evidence exists for potential HPV type competition in a cross-sectional study”. “…it is unlikely that HPV type-replacement will occur following large scale vaccination programs of young male adolescents.”

    Questions which are posed by many experts including editor of the Norwegian Medical Journal immunologist Charlotte Haug still remain unanswered:
    “If the vaccine is effective, viral replacement will take place”.
    “How will the vaccine affect other oncogenic strains of HPV? If HPV-16 and HPV-18 are effectively suppressed, will there be selective pressure on the remaining strains of HPV? Other strains may emerge as significant oncogenic serotypes”.

    For interest:
    Study title: “Potential overestimation of HPV vaccine impact due to unmasking of non-vaccine types: quantification using a multi-type mathematical model”.
    RESULTS: There could be an apparent maximum increase of 3-10% in long-term cervical cancer incidence due to non-vaccine HPV types following vaccination.

Speak Your Mind