While every scientist in the HPV world agrees that the impact on H&N cancers will be the same as cervical, because Merck has not done a clinical trial to prove so, they cannot talk about the opportunity and potential. This is an FDA issue and not a science issue. The approval for genital warts, was easy to get through the FDA, but it will take time and money to get an H&N oral cancer approval, and likely 5 years or more to do so.

Bottom line is that third parties like OCF and others can make the science argument while Merck is prohibited from talking about it, and we routinely do. The only time I get flack for doing so at a cancer conference is from someone who is anally evidence based. There is no actual evidence other than the fact that we know that the vaccine prevents persistent HPV16 infections. We know that oral cancers are caused by persistent HPV16 infections, ergo it will prevent oral cancers logically. But the FDA requires an actual trial to demonstrate what is believed.

My personal belief is that if we start vaccinating boys we will see the numbers in rates of incidence decline. Definitive proof that the vaccine did it? No... but what else would account for the change? You have to remember that the dental community and even the cancer community is full of evidence based only people. If it has not been proven that he earth is round, than it is just as likely that it is flat, regardless of prevailing wisdom. The facts that lead to conclusions have to have a proven direct connection, not an extrapolated conclusion.