this post was submitted on 11 Aug 2023
23 points (92.6% liked)

Ask Lemmy

26980 readers
1696 users here now

A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions

Please don't post about US Politics. If you need to do this, try !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world


Rules: (interactive)


1) Be nice and; have funDoxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them


2) All posts must end with a '?'This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?


3) No spamPlease do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.


4) NSFW is okay, within reasonJust remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com. NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].


5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions. If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.


Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.

Partnered Communities:

Tech Support

No Stupid Questions

You Should Know

Reddit

Jokes

Ask Ouija


Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Self-explanatory title

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Sallp@lemmy.world 23 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I believed that was do to risk of cervical cancer. A guy can't get that cancer so risk of HPV was lower for males.

[–] intensely_human@lemm.ee 4 points 1 year ago

Right, so say an 80/20 split in terms of the danger became a 100/0 split in terms of access to the vaccine.

[–] JoBo@feddit.uk -3 points 1 year ago

This seems unlikely. Vaccination is far less effective if you leave a large proportion of the population unprotected. That's why we vaccinate everyone against rubella even though it's only dangerous to foetuses if their mother catches it while pregnant.

I don't know if it was due to production shortages or a cautious roll out, or a bit of both. But I doubt it was due to the medical profession forgetting how vaccination works.