I read this article, but I didn't get that he was a doctors because a couple of his facts were way wrong in spite of it being overall good. As to the oral sex connection - that has been throughly explored and peer reviewed published in the journal of cancer. It is the mechanism of transfer.

If he understood that HPV16 is attracted to two types of cells one of them predominantly, he would get that the wet cells of the body are its first choice. (Squamous cells) They line every opening to the human body. When a woman goes down on a man, how much of his anatomy is composed of squamous cells, and therefore harboring potential HPV virus? Only the opening to the penis, a pretty small piece of geography. When a guy goes down on a woman, how much of her anatomy is covered in squamous cells? LIkely more than 90% of where his attention is going. The leap from these simple anatomical facts to men getting oral cancers from oral sex more than women is a putt, not a drive....

And there was a sexual revolution in the developed world in the 60's and 70's, sexual behaviors changed dramatically - in spite of his opinion - that it is something that remains constant. Anyone who was a teenager in the sixties, wasn't routinely getting lucking in the back seat of dad's Chevy being orally satisfied by his girlfriend. The recent 60 minutes show interviewing high school kids of all ages, that ALL said they were doing it, would never have been a truism in 40-50 years ago.

Lastly, he completely ignores mathematical progression as a cause in the uptick of the HPV disease. In a model that uses tobacco as the prime mover, it requires that people engage in a new lifestyle choice to get the cancer. That model is accurate and as smoking has declined from 44% of the American population in the 50's to about 19% today, there was a matching decline in oral cancer of a tobacco etiology. We didn't know that 10 years ago, but we know that today looking retrospectively at the data by anatomical site. This has recently been reviewed and published by Gillison and partners inside the statistics and information branch of NCI, with a view towards what will be going on in 2020. When you speak about the spread of a virus however, it is not a choice, it is a mathematically increasing progression, as the population of infected people do what they were already doing to new uninfected people. This is the very basis of the most common of information we have on viral outbreaks that are spread through human contacts, and has been well understood for decades. If he is a doctor... epidemiology cannot be his area of expertise.