HPV (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Health and Safety



Message


EmeraldsPheonix -> HPV (10/23/2011 1:31:14 PM)

im just starting a new topic that is of personal concern and it is based on Ishtarr's post in the bareback dogging thread and i also posted there but i thought that this deserved a thread of its own.

quote:


quote:

ORIGINAL: Ishtarr

quote:

ORIGINAL: CynthiaWVirginia

Years ago I was a dumb ass and had unprotected sex, thank God I was lucky and didn't catch some of the things my friends caught. Unless you want the doctor to be burning or freezing genital warts off your penis (maybe you are a masochist)...



Condoms do not offer protection against HPV (genital wart) because very often, the warts are in a location that isn't covered by a condom.
HPV can even be contagious without clearly visible warts showing, so even if you visually inspect the area, and use a condom, you can still get affected with the virus.
HPV can be transmitted through any form of contact, including blow jobs, hand jobs, oral, mastrubation, or touching of any kind without a virus barrier.

Most people infected with HPV never show symptoms (warts) and wouldn't even ever know they have the virus without an STD test alerting them to it.
50% of the population has, at one time or another, been contaminated with HPV. Most of them clear the virus without even knowing they had it to begin with. In some cases, HPV can cause cervical or other cancers, some of them more life threatening than others.
In some cases, it may take decades -or never- before a person clears the virus, though most people clear it within 2 years from contamination.





ok Ishtarr i do have to say that this is new info to me and I HAVE HPV. i never knew it was from warts and have never really had wart outbreaks that i know of. I get tested yearly for all STD/STI's and have came back clean. the only way i knew i had HPV was because i had a pap come back positive and then got it tested further and found out that i had mild displatia (spelling may be wrong). the thing that is catching me off guard is that you said some people clear it after 2 years. i find this kinda as a relief to me because other than about a year ago when i came back positive again though it wasnt tested to see if i was still at mild displatia or not all other paps and STD/STI screenings that i have had came back negative.

Is this a good thing?

i know me "airing" my personal business isnt the best since me and my husband are looking around for a possible 3rd to add to our household but now i am interested in this.


so anyone with any other info please feel free to post it here or send me a CMail with the info or both.




MistressLilliana -> RE: HPV (10/23/2011 1:44:23 PM)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_papillomavirus

HPV does not ALWAYS include genital warts! Many women get HPV and don't even know it and many times a women's body can fight it off. It can be very serious though. Instead of copying and pasting it all, above is a link for more info.




EmeraldsPheonix -> RE: HPV (10/23/2011 1:47:22 PM)

thank you Lilliana Ma'am




Hisprettybaby -> RE: HPV (10/23/2011 1:51:02 PM)

Quite a number of years ago, I got HPV from being raped. I hadn't had sex with anyone for years before or after that rape, so I know exactly when I got it. Anyway, I had no warts at all, only abnormal pap smears. Then, eventually, it turned into carcinoma in-situ and I had a cervical conization(removal of a good portion of the cervix). After that, all my STD testings have come up clean. I got rid of it with the conization.




MistressLilliana -> RE: HPV (10/23/2011 1:57:45 PM)

You are very welcome!




EmeraldsPheonix -> RE: HPV (10/23/2011 2:00:39 PM)

good for you Hisprettybaby.

im hoping that mine resoves itself though i wish i could find out about when i contracted the fricker. i know which pap it showed up on so i know approx when but because of mental health messes that i had at that time from my rape when i was young and from an anal rape in march of 2008 i know it had to have been within 2008 that i got it because it showed up on my december 08 pap and the colposcopy was done in early 2009 and that was before i moved to the state im in now and everything else has came back good since then and i have been getting mentally better too and have been with my husband since october 2009 so yea. the wiki site that Mistress lillana posted is very informational and actually has some other things that caught my attention but im going to read it again and such later because of something that is going on recently that i think might be connected but im getting it checked out by the doc soon.




Ishtarr -> RE: HPV (10/23/2011 2:01:34 PM)

As a standard disclaimer: I'm not a medical expert, ask you doctor, blah blah.

I have HPV, I found out because I was diagnosed with early stage 1 cervical cancer.
I'll probably be at risk for the rest of my life, so I've done quite a bit of research on this subject.

It used to be assumed that HPV is never cleared, and that if you contract it, you have it for life. Currently, most sources seem to think that it's possible to clear the virus, and that if you do, it's probably going to happen within two years of infection.
The likelihood of clearing it if you have it longer than that become smaller every year (from what I understand).

There are over a 100 different strains of HPV, it's possible to be contaminated with more than one at any given time, and while having and clearing a certain strain will give you lifelong immunity to that specific strain, you can still get infected with it's other forms.
I have no information on if certain strains may be easier to clear than others.

Dysplatia is the symptom caused by HPV that can in turn cause cervical cancer. It's an alteration of the cell that is in a pre-cancer stage. It can be accompanied with a visible enlargement of the cells, but is often only visible under microscope.
It's different than a wart, in that warts aren't necessarily pre-cancerous, though they can be, and the likelihood of cells becoming dusplatic is larger if there have been warts in the area.
Women can still get cancer, or dysplatic cells even if there have never been visible warts.

If you have the virus, and especially if you've already had dysplatic cells, you will need to keep a close eye on your health for the rest of your life, unless your doctor can positively confirm that you've totally cleared the virus.
You should be tested EVER year, whether you've had unprotected sex or not, and should notify your health care provider of your previous infection and dysplatic cells every time you are tested.

Especially when considering a pregnancy you need to be careful, because illness or pregnancy and other conditions that affect and weaken the immune system can trigger outbreaks.
If you have outward symptoms while giving birth, you have a large likelihood of infecting the baby with the virus too, so you need to notify your gynecologist and may need symptom treatment prior to giving birth.

Talk to your doctor about this.

As a side note, there is a relatively new vaccine that is said to protect against the forms of HPV that are most likely to cause dysplatia and cervical cancer. Women who want to get this vaccine should do so before they become sexually active. This vaccine does not protect against all strains of HPV.

If there are any people with more medical expertise than me on this site, who notice any mistakes I may have made in the previous information PLEASE CORRECT THEM.

Ishtar




TheFireWithinMe -> RE: HPV (10/23/2011 2:12:23 PM)

quote:

It's an alteration of the cell that is in a pre-cancer stage.


Almost. dysplasia is abnormal changes in cells, in this case abnormal changes in the cells lining the uterus.

BTW Hpb, conization is the removal of a cone-shaped sample of the uterus, most commonly for biopsy purposes but also as a treatment.




EmeraldsPheonix -> RE: HPV (10/23/2011 3:23:11 PM)

thanks again ishtarr for the added info and fire for your input i will make sure to talk to my baby doc about that when i call her about everything else that has been happening.




DeviantlyD -> RE: HPV (10/23/2011 3:39:40 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: TheFireWithinMe

quote:

It's an alteration of the cell that is in a pre-cancer stage.


Almost. dysplasia is abnormal changes in cells, in this case abnormal changes in the cells lining the uterus.

BTW Hpb, conization is the removal of a cone-shaped sample of the uterus, most commonly for biopsy purposes but also as a treatment.


TheFireWithinMe is providing some misleading and incorrect information here.

Yes dysplasia is an abnormal change in cells, but it is also a proliferation in growth of them. The type of dysplasia being discussed here relates to cervical dysplasia. While the cervix is part of the uterus, to say that the dysplasia we are discussing here is "in the cells lining the uterus" is erroneous. Cervical dysplasia refers to the cells covering the cervix. The cells lining the inside of a uterus are part of the endometrium. For pre-menopausal women, those cells are sloughed off each month during menses.

Again, the indication that conization procedure is "of the uterus" is misleading. It's of the cervix, which is one anatomical piece of the uterus and not the uterus as a whole.

Dysplastic cells may or may not become cancerous, but all cancerous cells started out as dysplastic.

Here are a couple of links from the sites of well respected medical facilities.

http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/cervical-dysplasia/AN01657

http://www.umm.edu/altmed/articles/cervical-dysplasia-000034.htm

I would urge everyone on here to take every post they read in this forum (including my own) with a grain of salt and use it as a jumping off point to find information from credible sources like your own physician or health care provider. I have seen a lot of misinformation on this forum. While much of it may be well intentioned, it is not always correct. Please keep this in mind.




TheFireWithinMe -> RE: HPV (10/23/2011 3:49:50 PM)

quote:

TheFireWithinMe is providing some misleading and incorrect information here.


Watch your words, that implies what I did is deliberate. At worst I provided a partial definition. Yeah I thought and pictured cervix and typed uterus, it wasn't to be misleading but rather that my brain ain't working.




Hisprettybaby -> RE: HPV (10/23/2011 3:49:56 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: TheFireWithinMe
BTW Hpb, conization is the removal of a cone-shaped sample of the uterus, most commonly for biopsy purposes but also as a treatment.

I know what a cervical cone is. Not only have I had one, I've observed them in nursing school years ago. What you are saying is very misleading. The tissue is removed from the CERVIX and NOT from tne body of the UTERUS. To say it's a sample of the uterus would lead many to believe it could be from anywhere on/in the uterus, which is totally wrong. It is from specifically the cervix.




TheFireWithinMe -> RE: HPV (10/23/2011 3:53:44 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Hisprettybaby


quote:

ORIGINAL: TheFireWithinMe
BTW Hpb, conization is the removal of a cone-shaped sample of the uterus, most commonly for biopsy purposes but also as a treatment.

I know what a cervical cone is. Not only have I had one, I've observed them in nursing school years ago. What you are saying is very misleading. The tissue is removed from the CERVIX and NOT from tne body of the UTERUS. To say it's a sample of the uterus would lead many to believe it could be from anywhere on/in the uterus, which is totally wrong. It is from specifically the cervix.


True but what it isn't is a "removal of a good portion of the cervix" as you claimed. Yes I should have said cervix BUT it is still a cone shaped sample and not a "good portion" of it. AGAIN not misleading but if you are going to talk about that you should look at your own words as well.




Ishtarr -> RE: HPV (10/23/2011 3:58:36 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: TheFireWithinMe


quote:

ORIGINAL: Hisprettybaby


quote:

ORIGINAL: TheFireWithinMe
BTW Hpb, conization is the removal of a cone-shaped sample of the uterus, most commonly for biopsy purposes but also as a treatment.

I know what a cervical cone is. Not only have I had one, I've observed them in nursing school years ago. What you are saying is very misleading. The tissue is removed from the CERVIX and NOT from tne body of the UTERUS. To say it's a sample of the uterus would lead many to believe it could be from anywhere on/in the uterus, which is totally wrong. It is from specifically the cervix.


True but what it isn't is a "removal of a good portion of the cervix" as you claimed. Yes I should have said cervix BUT it is still a cone shaped sample and not a "good portion" of it. AGAIN not misleading but if you are going to talk about that you should look at your own words as well.



Where does she say "a good portion of it"?
Her post hasn't been edited, so maybe I'm reading wrong, but I don't see her using that phrase.




TheFireWithinMe -> RE: HPV (10/23/2011 4:00:01 PM)

quote:

Where does she say "a good portion of it"?
Her post hasn't been edited, so maybe I'm reading wrong, but I don't see her using that phrase.



Post #4: Then, eventually, it turned into carcinoma in-situ and I had a cervical conization(removal of a good portion of the cervix).




Hisprettybaby -> RE: HPV (10/23/2011 4:09:23 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheFireWithinMe

quote:

Where does she say "a good portion of it"?
Her post hasn't been edited, so maybe I'm reading wrong, but I don't see her using that phrase.



Post #4: Then, eventually, it turned into carcinoma in-situ and I had a cervical conization(removal of a good portion of the cervix).

In MY case, they DID take out a good portion of my cervix. Since you're such an expert, can you tell me exactly how much is the "right" amount to suit you? The link I provided said "Conization of the cervix is defined as excision of a cone-shaped or cylindrical wedge from the cervix uteri that includes the transformation zone and all or a portion of the endocervical canal. It is used for the definitive diagnosis of squamous or glandular intraepithelial lesions, for excluding microinvasive carcinomas, and for conservative treatment of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN)."

The picture below, from the link I provided, looks like a pretty good portion of the cervix to me.

[image]local://upfiles/1193382/3EDCB9565208418D98E2BEC7999C4C93.jpg[/image]




EmeraldsPheonix -> RE: HPV (10/23/2011 5:04:31 PM)

deviantlyD thank you for those sites and they yet again showed me that i need to tell my OB thats doing my pregnancy a reminder about the positive results i had back in 08-09 so that she can keep an eye on it since the second site that you posted said that it can increase and get worse during pregnancy. the good thing is that my dysplatia is mild so it should resolve on its own since i have had like 3 negative tests from late 2010, june this year and just this last appt that i had with my OB for the pregnancy.

i am so glad that you all are telling me what you have went through with yours and more info so i know what i might be having to look at in the future.

thank you.




TheFireWithinMe -> RE: HPV (10/23/2011 5:30:18 PM)

quote:

In MY case, they DID take out a good portion of my cervix. Since you're such an expert, can you tell me exactly how much is the "right" amount to suit you? The link I provided said "Conization of the cervix is defined as excision of a cone-shaped or cylindrical wedge from the cervix uteri that includes the transformation zone and all or a portion of the endocervical canal. It is used for the definitive diagnosis of squamous or glandular intraepithelial lesions, for excluding microinvasive carcinomas, and for conservative treatment of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN)."

The picture below, from the link I provided, looks like a pretty good portion of the cervix to me.


What suits me isn't the issue. What is the issue is the size if the sample which varies. Further you made no mention of a cone shaped sample before my post and in that post you made it sound as if a large sample is taken not that this is what happened with you. So I clarified what you had written so that others would know that it isn't always the case... which to use your word would be MISLEADING.




samboct -> RE: HPV (10/23/2011 5:34:41 PM)

Ishtarr et al

I had to do a little digging on topic a couple of months ago...

A few points-

There are some differences in the two vaccines currently available, although more are in development.

Cervarix a bivalent vaccine (protects against 2 strains), uses a more sophisticated adjuvant (an adjuvant is a compound that helps alert the immune system that it should be engaged) that is less likely to cause irritation and will allow the vaccine to stay active longer. Gardasil is a tetravalent vaccine and protects against 4 strains (including 16 and 18 IIRC which are the two strains that Cervarix protects against) but the vaccine may not last as long. Caution-the vaccine does NOT work for life- it's probable that boosters may be needed after some years.

The advantage of Gardasil is that the additional strains it targets lead to genital warts in men- hence the push to immunize young men and women with this vaccine.

There is a geographical linkage to the various stains of HPV-IIRC, in Thailand, the strains that are most commonly linked to cervical cancer are NOT 16 and 18. (maybe 54?)

Some docs are saying that since there are a lot of strains of HPV- and you only get infected with one strain at a time- the vaccine will protect you from infection with additional strains. and that the idea that vaccination should be limited to people with no sexual history is in error. YMMV.

Sam




Hisprettybaby -> RE: HPV (10/23/2011 5:46:34 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: TheFireWithinMe
you made no mention of a cone shaped sample before my post and in that post you made it sound as if a large sample is taken not that this is what happened with you. So I clarified what you had written so that others would know that it isn't always the case... which to use your word would be MISLEADING.

See the quote of my initial post below:
quote:

ORIGINAL: Hisprettybaby
Quite a number of years ago, I got HPV from being raped. I hadn't had sex with anyone for years before or after that rape, so I know exactly when I got it. Anyway, I had no warts at all, only abnormal pap smears. Then, eventually, it turned into carcinoma in-situ and I had a cervical conization(removal of a good portion of the cervix). After that, all my STD testings have come up clean. I got rid of it with the conization.

I said this before you posted to correct me, and you know that as well as I do. Notice the word conization. What shape do you suppose that's referring to? Square? Rectangular? Triangular? Cone-shaped of course. As for the size of the sample, refer AGAIN to the image I inserted in post #16, which was taken directly from the link I provided. It looks like pretty good sized sample to me, maybe half the entire cervix. Maybe you aren't as educated in medical matters as you seem to think you are.




Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.0625