Reducing the Pool of Infected Women Would Lower Rates of Transmission

The protective effect of widespread HPV vaccination against cervical cancer requires a substantial fraction of susceptible women to get the vaccine--that would set up a formidable protective wall, even for those not immunized--a concept known as "herd immunity." Reducing the pool of infected women would lower rates of transmission to partners, and thence reduce infections in the community. While vaccinating males would likely have a similar effect on transmission (as well as protecting them against genital warts), there are insufficient data on male response rates to the vaccine to proceed in that direction at present. Of course, since not all cancers are caused by the four types in the vaccine, some routine check-ups for genital abnormalities would still be required: Pap tests and gyn exams. But as the number of cases of cervical HPV fell over time, the incidence of transmission would also fall, and the frequency of medical and surgical interventions for diagnosis and treatment of female reproductive system abnormalities would also plummet--thus giving rise to a net savings for society in terms of health expenditures.

Given these facts, and the fact that the vaccine is safe, and the fact that such vaccinations do NOT (as some "health groups" with moralistic motives have claimed) promote promiscuity, I can't understand why there is any debate or controversy over having all girls between the ages of 9 and 15 vaccinated as quickly as such a program could be organized.