AllergyNet Australia and Twitter are my professional social media
There are 3 Blogs:
Allergy&Asthma
Home Page = Other Medical
EvenFourLines = Non-Medical

John Weiner does not work for, consult to, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this website, and has no relevant affiliations.

As The Worm Turns


HPV Vaccination: Q&A with Dr Julia Brotherton

We are pleased that Dr Julia Brotherton has taken the time to answer our questions on HPV vaccination. Dr Julia Brotherton is Medical Director of Australia’s National HPV Vaccination Program Register

Dr Brotherton is a member of the HPV Implementation Working Group and is currently undertaking a PhD on HPV vaccination in Australia. For the past eight years she has been involved in research and policy development informing the implementation and evaluation of HPV vaccination programs in Australia.

Here are the questions and her answers:

Electron micrograph of HPV virus. NIH-Visuals Online# AV-8610-3067. Public domain

1. What exactly is HPV? How does infection occur? How does someone know if they have it?

HPV, or Human Papillomavirus to give it its full title, is a very common and usually harmless virus. In fact it is so common that it really is a normal part of being a human being to meet and usually clear several types of HPV in your lifetime. Infection with one of the 40 or so types of the virus that can infect the genital area usually occurs during sex or skin-to-skin genital contact. Most of the time you will never even know that you were infected as generally acute infection causes no symptoms – unless you have one of the types that can cause genital warts (fleshy lumps that appear on the genital area) .

Most of the time HPV will be detected by your immune system and cleared by your body without any treatment within a year. The importance of HPV lies in the fact that sometimes people with an HPV infection can’t clear the virus and it remains hidden in their cells. Over time the virus can cause abnormalities to develop in the cells. For example these are the changes that a Pap test picks up in a woman’s cervical cells.

If left for long enough (usually many years) sometimes these changes can develop into cancer. Cancers that can be caused by HPV in this way include cancer of the cervix (neck of the womb), other genital cancers of the anus, vagina, vulva, and penis, and some types of throat cancers.

2. Are there any high-risk groups for HPV infection?

It is estimated that four out of five people will have a HPV infection at some point in their lives. Many people catch HPV from their first sexual partner, without ever knowing it. Anyone who is sexually active (and that’s most of us at some point!) is at risk of contracting HPV.

3. What is the link between HPV and cancer? What types of cancer are linked to HPV? If HPV were eradicated, would those cancers still occur?

Of the 40 HPV types that affect the genital tract, 15 are designated as ‘high-risk’ types associated with the development of cervical cancer, anogenital diseases such as vulva, vaginal, penile and anal cancers and the cell changes that occur before actual cancer, as well as cancers of the head and neck. Practically all cases of cervical cancer are caused by HPV, about 80% of anal cancers, 40-50% of penile, vulval and vaginal cancers and 30% of head and neck cancers. HPV types 16 and 18 cause 70-80% of all cervical cancers, and about 90% of the other cancers. If HPV were eradicated we would see a massive drop in the number of these cancers occurring, with virtual elimination of cervical cancer.

 

Pap (cervical) smear. Normal cells on left; HPV-infected cells with mild dysplasia (precancer) on right. Ed Uthman, MD. 20 July 2006. Public domain

4. Is there proof that HPV vaccination prevents infection and prevents cancer?

Large clinical trials (of nearly 20,000 women) demonstrated that the vaccine is remarkably effective (close to 100%) at preventing HPV infection with the HPV types that it is designed to protect against (these are types 16 and 18, which cause most cancers due to HPV, and types 6 and 11, which cause most genital warts). The trials did show though that the vaccine does not treat HPV once you are already infected with it – that is once it is already inside your cells. This is why it is really important to try to vaccinate people before they become sexually active and meet HPV infection for the first time.

The trials also looked at whether the vaccinated women developed pre-cancerous cell changes of the cervix due to HPV at the same rate as the unvaccinated women by conducting regular Pap tests. They found that the vaccine was strongly protective (>90%) against pre-cancerous cell changes caused by the HPV types the vaccine protects against. Those women who had changes that needed treatment in the trial were treated, as of course it would be unethical to allow cancer to develop in these women.

As we know from Pap screening programs around the world that treating these abnormalities prevents cancer developing, it has been accepted by the World Health Organisation that preventing these cell changes through HPV vaccination will also prevent cancers from developing. Similarly a large trial in men has shown that HPV infection and cell changes of the penis and anus can be prevented through vaccination.

5. What is in the vaccine? Can you catch HPV infection from the vaccine?

The vaccine doesn’t contain any live or killed virus so there is no possible way you can catch HPV through vaccination. Instead the vaccine is cleverly made up to look like the virus, which stimulates your body to produce antibodies that will protect you if you ever do meet the real virus. These ‘virus-like particles’ in the vaccine are made of one protein which is a normal part of the virus shell. It was Professor Ian Frazer’s laboratory in Queensland that helped pioneer the creation of these particles allowing the development of the vaccine.

6. What are the side effects of HPV vaccination?

Like most vaccinations, the HPV vaccine can cause some mild side effects such as soreness, swelling and redness at the injection site, or a mild temperature. These signs indicate that your body is producing an effective immune response to the vaccine. Sometimes people can also feel faint when given a vaccine, including HPV vaccine. If this happens it is important to lie down and rest until the feeling passes.

The most serious side effect that has been observed following HPV vaccination is anaphylaxis (a serious allergic reaction): after any immunisation a person should always stay for observation for 15 minutes. Fortunately this is very rare and can be effectively treated.

The current vaccination program includes safety monitoring to detect and manage important side effects. With any vaccination, it is important that any side effects are reported to the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) in Australia (and equivalent agencies in other countries). I would encourage GPs to notify side effects to their health authority. In Australia, information on how to report side effects is available by visiting the TGA website at www.tga.gov.au/consumers/problem.htm. Alternatively, you can report a problem or side effect by contacting the Adverse Medicine Events Line on 1300 134 237.

7. How long does immunity last?

So far we know that the vaccine remains effective after 8.5 years, with no cases of pre-cancerous Pap test results due to the HPV types covered by the vaccine reported among vaccinated women. Because antibody levels appear to be stable, it is highly likely that protection will be long lasting but this is being closely monitored in case a booster dose is ever needed.

8. Should regular Pap tests continue in women who have had the HPV vaccination? If so, why?

Yes. Women over the age of 18 who are, or who have ever been, sexually active need to have regular Pap tests even if they have been vaccinated against HPV. The HPV vaccine does not protect against all HPV types that can cause cervical cancer. Pap tests detect abnormal changes in the cells of the cervix and if abnormal changes are found, further tests will be done to see if treatment is needed.

9. Which countries in the world recommend HPV vaccination?

HPV vaccination has been approved and recommended in 100 countries and is supported by the World Health Organisation. The immunisation program is in its 7th year in Australia and the USA, with other developed countries such as the UK, France and Germany close behind in providing their populations with the vaccine.

10. Some groups in the USA claim that HPV vaccination will promote increased sexual behaviour. Is there any evidence that this occurs?

No. Not only is it well established that fear of HPV is not a barrier to becoming sexually active amongst adolescents, studies have now shown no difference in the time to onset of sexual activity between vaccinated and unvaccinated girls.

 

pic1_small_rgb

11. Are there any children who should NOT receive HPV vaccination?

Children should not receive the HPV vaccine if they have had a serious allergic reaction (anaphylaxis) to a previous HPV vaccine, yeast or any other vaccine components (aluminium, sodium chloride, L-histidine, polysorbate and sodium borate). The vaccine is not recommended for pregnant women.

12. Can a sexually-active older person benefit from the vaccine?

The HPV vaccine is most effective when given before a person is exposed to the HPV virus, that is, before they become sexually active. People who are sexually active may also benefit from the vaccine but they may get less benefit from it since they may have already acquired one or more HPV types covered by the vaccine.

13. Are there any comments that you would like to add?

These really are exciting times for cancer prevention. Australia has been the first country to see big falls in genital warts, HPV infections and pre-cancerous Pap test abnormalities since we introduced the HPV vaccination program for women in 2007. Now we are extending the program to boys so that we can reduce the circulation of these cancer causing viruses still further. Not only will the vaccine protect a boy’s future partner(s) from HPV but will also provide direct protection for him against infection with HPV and dramatically reduce his lifetime chance of developing HPV associated cancers himself.

I’m often asked why we have to vaccinate in the first year of high school and why can’t it be later (I think this reflects our own discomfort as parents about imagining our children ever becoming sexually active!). There are two main reasons really. Firstly, as explained above, the vaccine only works to prevent infection with HPV. Because it can’t be treated once you have it, from a population perspective the best way to control the spread of HPV is to protect people before they are exposed to the virus and that is before sexual activity.

The median age of first sexual intercourse in Australia is 16, so vaccinating at 12-13 years will achieve this. Secondly girls and boys at 12-13 years produce wonderful antibody responses to the vaccine so it is also an ideal time to maximise their protection against HPV using their young and healthy immune systems. A third practical reason is that, as I’m sure you can imagine, it is a bit easier to provide all three doses of vaccine, which are needed for protection, to kids at age 12-13 rather than to 16 year olds.

Thank you Dr Brotherton. AllergyNet Australia endorses HPV vaccination. Discuss with your doctor.

*The first two illustrations in this post were selected by AllergyNet Australia. The third illustration was supplied by Australia’s National HPV VAccination Program.

You CAN enjoy Twitter without tweeting

This tweet recently crossed my timeline:

“If you don’t engage, there is no point having followers. Agree?”

No. I don’t agree

"To Tweet or not To Tweet". Actor Edwin Booth as Hamlet in 1870. His brother John Wilkes Booth assassinated President Abraham Lincoln

Why? Because a comment like that immediately disenfranchises the 40% of those on Twitter who never tweet. These are the same people that go to public meetings and never ask questions. This is acceptable in a public meeting, and it should be on Twitter. Being inactive does not mean being disinterested.

People join Twitter for a variety of reasons,. For gossip, news, humour and information. And in the healthcare sphere, it’s information that is important. Good, reliable, orthodox information.

At the healthcare coalface it soon becomes clear that a large minority of the population fall into one or more of these categories:

  • are busy, have no time or interest to engage, just want the facts, then out
  • dislike chit-chat
  • are uncomfortable expressing their opinion
  • do not have English as their first language
  • are naturally laconic
  • are none of the above but, on the day, just don’t want to talk

It’s the role of the treating health worker to recognise one or more of these traits in a person, and offer choices and solutions for their presenting complaint in an appropriate way. But it is not their role to say “Look, if you don’t engage with me, you might as well leave”. It’s the same with professional Social Media.

People in healthcare on Twitter who demand engagement as a sine qua non of “following” are usually confident communicators who have spent their life discussing/arguing/presenting their point of view at seminars/meeting/lectures/classes. It so happens that a lot of well-adjusted citizens have either not had, or, importantly, not enjoyed, that type of experience. These followers are there to read and learn and understand. I am not alone in this opinion. Ted Rubin on Mashable has a similar view (see Why You Should Embrace Twitter Lurkers), although his approach is more business-orientated.

One of the great strengths of Twitter is its humanism, in the social science rather than philosophical sense. There is no need to like…love…talk…engage. If you are human, you can just be there.

Come to think of it, if you are NOT human, then I really would like a tweet from you…

 

 

 

Real Time Twitter In Medicine: USA, Australia, UK

The immediacy and power of Twitter are amazing. Not just for revolutions, natural disasters, major crimes, assistance in need. Not just to help the little guy when he gets done by incompetent bureaucracy. But in medicine. At every level.

Here I was this morning, eating breakfast near the southernmost tip of the Australian mainland, as close to Tasmania as you can be without getting your feet wet. I retweeted a link about whooping cough, reminding people to keep up these vaccinations at any age. Yes, grandparents too, because they cuddle their grandkids.

A reply comes swinging in from Dr Julie Carter @nyred , a Brit living in New York. She can get shots in the USA, but what about the UK, she asks. I was hard up being accurate, so I brought in Dr Julie Leask @JulieLeask , a Senior Lecturer at Sydney Medical School, specialising in vaccination. She provides some info and calls in Dr Peter English @petermbenglish from the UK, editor of the Journal Vaccines in Practice. Peter inputs a wealth of data, and responds to my further direct questions.

When done, Dr Karen Price @brookmanknight chips in. She is Chair of the Women in General Practice Committee of the RACGP in Victoria Australia. She followed the conversation, presumably while eating her breakfast as well, and made some nice noises about the interesting dialogue.

We all learnt something. We couldn’t be further away on this planet. And, most importantly, my coffee didn’t get cold.

Summary – in the UK, you will not get booster pertussis shots as an adult through the NHS unless you have never had a primary course, or, in exceptional circumstances, as part of a pertussis outbreak control. You can get non-NHS-funded booster injections from a private non-NHS doctor.

Happiness. Is There Anything You Can Do To Increase It?

You can find 1621 quotes about happiness, and that’s just from one site. Most are brilliant. Like “Happiness is a warm puppy” (Charles Schultz). Some, like Bertrand Russell’s “The secret of happiness is to face the fact that the world is horrible, horrible, horrible” somehow don’t hit the spot.

Many people have trouble being happy. Health workers deal with this problem all the time. And many health workers also have trouble being happy. So, can we point to stuff that helps?

ReachOut.com is a terrific Aussie site for anyone, particularly young people, who are unhappy or depressed. Every page is worth reading. What caught my eye was a post called What Is Happiness from last year. It quotes Seligman’s formula that happiness is

The Buddha taught the acceptance of unhappiness, the incongruity of dualism, and living for the moment (Borobudur Temple, Yogyakarta. Photo JW)

50% genetic (personality), 10% circumstances, and, surprisingly, 40% voluntary. And an Australian paper published last month, with the laborious title of “Exploring the Causes of Subjective Well-Being: A Content Analysis of Peoples’ Recipes for Long-Term Happiness“, confirms and expands on that formula. I recommend this paper to anyone interested in happiness, which is everyone. It’s very user friendly while being scientific, an uncommon combination.

And the breakdown of the voluntary things you can do to improve happiness (Behaviour, Thinking, Wanting), with concrete examples, are worth writing down. Or entering into your smart phone. Here is a partial list from the paper:

Some factors under personal voluntary control

  • Meditation
  • Acts of Kindness
  • Forgiveness
  • A sense of wonder
  • Increased physical activity
  • Thinking of the present moment
  • Music
  • Hobbies
  • Laughter
  • Sunshine
  • Rest

Then there is the “Dime Experiment”. During a psychological experiment, subjects were asked to photocopy a page in an outside office, and half of them “found” a 10 cent coin on the machine and were able to photocopy the sheet for nothing. The other half had to dig into their pocket for the money. That was the real experiment, because they were then questioned, and those that found the coin reported a higher happiness level with life as a whole. They felt happier about their whole life compared to those who did not find the coin!

If you try and find the source of this experiment, it’s not easy. It appears in Barbara Ehrenreich’s blog and book, without attribution. It’s quoted a lot on Google, usually as a “famous experiment”. I finally tracked it to Prof Norbert Schwarz.

Prof Norbert Schwarz, Charles Horton Cooley Collegiate Professor of Psychology, University of Michigan. Prof Schwarz published the famous Dime Experiment (see text)

I emailed Prof Schwarz, who is the Charles Horton Cooley Collegiate Professor of Psychology at the University of Michigan. He very kindly emailed back with the data. His original paper is written in German. I can confirm the details of the Dime Experiment, and that the findings were statistically significant.

So, we have some voluntary control over happiness, and we have the Dime Experiment. Does that help us? Well, I can’t give you the answer to happiness in 500 words. You could read a million words and still be sad. My summary would be:

Work with what you can:

1. Build resilience by improving your 40% of voluntary happiness (Factors under personal voluntary control)

2. Really enjoy the small pleasures of your day (The Dime Experiment)

And seek help if you can’t.

Medicine, Social Media and Clinical Excellence

The brouhaha about doctors and social media continues.

The Doctor by English social realist painter Luke Fildes, 1891. It was inspired by the death of his own son from TB

Dr Dike Drummond writes on KevinMD that medical Social Media is a bubble economy with “no return on investment” and it’s just  ”one more thing to burn you out”. Leave it alone, he says. Doctors with no interest in education outside their own patients, and whose only concern is financial, will take his advice.

At the other extreme, the Mayo Clinic has launched itself into the medical clouds and clearly plans to go for the stars. Their advice for doctors embarking on the same journey is a laconic 12-Word Policy: Don’t Lie, Don’t Pry, Don’t Cheat, Can’t Delete, Don’t Steal, Don’t Reveal.

Meanwhile, guidelines for doctors are appearing everywhere. Many contain good advice, albeit wordy, such as this recent 12 page report from the Massachusetts Medical Society.

I have always felt that any behavioural differences between Real Medicine and professional Social Media are moot. These views are expressed here and here. We learn ethical behaviour as students, we teach ethical behaviour to students. It’s exactly the same ethical behaviour expected in Social Media. There is no difference.

Actually, this post was triggered by a Tweet which caught my eye yesterday:


Clinical excellence is entwined with good medical practice. Good medical practice leads to good professional social media. Ergo, clinical excellence can be a professional tool in social media.

Let’s look at this more closely using the clinical excellence to which Dr Margaret Chisolm refers. It comes from the Miller-Coulson Academy of Clinical Excellence at Johns Hopkins. The report is here, and I reproduce their terrific definition of clinical excellence:

(Clinical Excellence is) “Achieving a level of mastery in the following six areas as they relate to patient care—(1) communication and interpersonal skills, (2) professionalism and humanism, (3) diagnostic acumen, (4) skillful negotiation of the health care system, (5) knowledge, and (6) scholarly approach to clinical practice—as well as exhibiting a passion for patient care, explicitly modeling this mastery to medical trainees, and collaborating with investigators to advance science and discovery.”

It is clear that communication and interpersonal skills, professionalism and humanism, and a scholarly approach to clinical practice are all immediately applicable to Social Media.

What does this all mean? It means an identity between real medicine and social media for physicians. It means a link between clinical excellence and social media for physicians. Medicine, Social Media and Clinical Excellence. Let’s do it.

 

How much of a social media profile can doctors have?

(This post is my rapid response published online by BMJ on 13 Feb 2012 in response to the  journal’s paper published 23 Jan 2012)
How much of a social media profile can doctors have? The answer is – as much of a profile as they have in real life. There is no distinction between social media and reality. So many words are posted/blogged/published about how social media is somehow different. It is not.

Should you say ‘yes’ if a patient rang you and said she wanted to be your friend? No. Therefore non-commercial Facebook access is out.

Should you say ‘leave the room please’ if a patient attended one of your public lectures? No. Therefore Twitter for education is fine.

Should you identify a patient in conversation on a crowded lift/in a public canteen/on public transport? No. Therefore you don’t identify them on social media.

In fact, should you talk to anyone about a patient apart from referring doctors/legal guardians/in court? No.

Should you discuss the operation/resuscitation/disease of an anonymous patient to a group at at party? No. Therefore you don’t do this on social media.

We learnt about this in medical school, as I did 40 years ago. Doctors can and should involve themselves in social media because, as the Mayo Clinic says: ‘Our patients are doing it, that’s where we need to be’

We cannot legislate or pontificate against stupidity. It requires the same undergraduate education about ethics that has been taught since Hippocrates.

The distinction between social media and real life is moot. Arguments about permanent storage and retrieval of your comments are irrelevant.

As I have said elsewhere, being Social on Professional Media – It’s Not Rocket Science