Cervical cancer cases are soaring among women in their late 20s, even though the virus behind it has almost been eliminated in younger generations, new figures show.
OK. Not that it is OK, but that that’s what is happening, OK.
But a separate report from Cancer Research UK warns that cases of cervical cancer are soaring among those in their late 20s, who grew up before national vaccination was introduced.
More than 3,000 women are being diagnosed with cervical cancer each year, including around 400 cases among those aged 25 to 29.
Among this group, rates rose from 12 cases per 100,000 women in 2004 – 6 to 18.5 cases per 100,000 in 2015/17 – a 54 per cent increase.
Experts said the figures reflected low screening rates among such women, with just 61.9 per cent taking up invitations for smears, compared with 78.4 per cent of those those in their early 50s.
But that’s idiocy. Screening finds cancer. A low screening rate cannot be responsible for finding more cases of cancer.
What was the screening frequency in 2004?
The article implies that it was 46% over all age-groups in 2008 so the screening rate for that age group has presumably gone up by over 30% since 2004.
The rest of the increase is due to higher levels of promiscuity that permits the spread of HPV.
Wasn’t this the vaccination they wanted to give to girls at school? I remember thinking that the briefing around it was very strange and that I was not sure I would put my daughter through it
Depends on who the increased percentage represents. if it is mainly those who have been listening to advice concerning early cancer symptoms and asked for smear tests, rather than a random cross-section of the community – then the numbers are explicable.
A low screening rate mean that cases which would have been detected early, and thereby prevented, later became unpreventable, and only noted at that stage.
‘a 54 per cent increase’ !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Fun with maths.
6 in a 100,000.
OMFG . . . we’re all gonna die!
Why is the matriarchal medical profession paying attention to women’s trivialities?
Ian Bennett. That would be true if it were deaths. It’s not true for diagnoses.
More screening will always increase the diagnosis rate, as slow-moving non-dangerous cases are added to the dangerous ones.
Or…. the only ones taking up the screening invitations are the ones who are a bit worried there might be something wrong…
The screening finds issues before they turn into cancer, and so you can be treated before you get full blown cancer. A bit like the screening on a mole I had a couple of weeks ago, have a look, see something a bit iffy and deal with it before it spreads.
Not going to be an issue with my daughter’s generation as she will be immunised against the HPV virus that causes it. Son will be immunised too in case he bats for the other side or takes a liking for cougars as the same virus causes mouth cancers.
Worth bearig in mind: there are umpteen types of Cervical Cancer and immunisation is only against a few.
Also, raised awareness and improved detection tech – 10 cells vs 1,000 cells
@Gamecock
+1
A 100% increase from 1 in 1 million to 2 in 1 million – crikey, must spend £billions /sarc
A 1.54 RR in a rare disease is statistical noise.