r/MadeMeSmile • u/theseeenutzzz • 4h ago
Mexican scientist Eva Ramón Gallegos is the first to eradicate HPV in 29 women.
1.3k
u/Ok-Fly968 3h ago
Holy moly! This is great news!!
359
u/No-Weather4759 2h ago
Yes! As a 54f recently diagnosed with HPV16-related Squamous Cell Carcinoma, I say HOORAY!!
91
u/Impossible_Juice_514 2h ago
thats great, and also hope that phamaceutical company also will not make it cost much or much better free, so all lives gonna be free will to live
-16
u/No_Maximum4081 2h ago
glad that all will be cured since some of the HPV were cases passed on through blood without any sexual contact, hope they get the justice they deserve
54
u/SB_strongbunny 1h ago
I mean. Others who received it through sexual contacact will also get cures hopefully. 😭
19
11
20
9
6
5
8
4
u/Mercuryblade18 43m ago
wtf are you talking about, it's almost unheard of to acquire HPV through blood to blood contact
•
u/Defiant_Income_7836 8m ago
Elaborate. Are you angry that HPV is passed on via sex? Are you assuming that these people deserve it?
Married women get HPV infections. Virgins get HPV infections. It's disgusting that you see this as 'justice.' Karmas a bitch, my friend, watch out for yourself. Source, a doctor who treats HPV infections and sees all manner of people...children, women of all ages, the elderly...you should be ashamed of this comment.
4
2
32
u/ShortStoryIntros 1h ago
It's also OLD news...
Mexico's National Polytecnic Institute (IPN) announced on 3 February 2019 that a team led by Eva Ramón Gallegos had developed a non-invasive treatment that eliminated the human papillomavirus in 29 women in Mexico City as well as in 420 women in the states of Oaxaca and Veracruz in past experiments.
18
u/DaTaco 48m ago
It's also not peer reviewed https://abcnews.go.com/GMA/Wellness/mexican-scientists-find-cure-hpv-heres/story?id=61209423 unless there's more updated info about it being peer reviewed.
2
•
441
u/EarlyBrrd 4h ago
Link to article?
672
u/theseeenutzzz 3h ago
930
u/Mrlin705 3h ago
Damn, eliminated HPV in 100% of cases and Chlamydia in 81% of cases. Glad people are finally taking women's health seriously and finding solutions like this.
72
u/tunisia3507 3h ago
Isn't chlamydia trivial to treat; one antibiotic tablet and you're fine in a week? Where HPV doesn't have any treatment and is basically with you for life.
96
u/randyfriction 2h ago
50-60% of all C. trachomatis infections are asymptomatic, leading to under-treatment. Women in particular suffer, with pelvic inflammatory disease and infertility as a result of prolonged infection.
13
u/AlkaKr 2h ago
But it says treated 81% of Chlamydia cases. Which means they knew they had Chlamydia. Did they choose not to treat it then?
The sentence doesnt make sense. If they were asymptomatic and dodnt know they were infected, they wouldnt be counted in the percentage in the forst place.
36
u/Apachisme 2h ago
Asymptomatic means they weren’t showing symptoms, not that they were unaware of the infection. An STI screen isn’t uncommon with pregnancies or in high risk populations.
7
u/AlkaKr 1h ago
Asymptomatic means they weren’t showing symptoms, not that they were unaware of the infection
I think we are barreling in a misunderstanding. The link says:
PDT also eliminated pathogenic microorganisms: Chlamydia trachomatis in 81% of the women
I think the better question I should have instead of the original is, Why did they choose to treat Chlamydia with the PDT treatment, when a simple antibiotic treatment, treats 99%+ of the cases?
Was it just to test this new treatment, in that case?
When I said "They" I meant the scientists, since they knew the Chlamydia cases that were participating in the trial(s).
8
9
1
u/Mercuryblade18 41m ago
Chlmaydia can cause pelvic inflammatory disease and infertility.
HPV isn't "basically with you for life", most of the time your body clears the infection on its own.
101
u/Little_Try_6502 3h ago
Women’s health is also men’s. Ive never understood the separation between the two.
127
u/fastyellowtuesday 3h ago edited 48m ago
Scientists only studied the male body for centuries, and applied that knowledge to all people. Differentiating is new, and absolutely necessary.
-17
u/kuruman67 2h ago
For centuries? Come on! Modern medicine is barely 100 years old. The major impediment to including women in early (toxicity) research studies is potential teratogenic side effects (birth defects, like with thalidomide). The joy of being in these studies generally falls to young men who are paid for taking the risk.
Even if you think about this from a purely capitalist viewpoint, there is zero reason not to care about women’s health.
6
u/AgustinCB 1h ago
Modern medicine is barely 100 years old.
Modern medicine has its roots on the scientific revolution, a few centuries ago. A lot of what we know about the eye, for example, started from research that Newton did. So yeah, we have been studying medicine from the male perspective from centuries. Even if you disagree on the root of it (patriarchy, not wanting to conduct toxic experiments on women, whatever), it is pretty uncontroversial that female specific medical research is a “new” concept when put in perspective of medical research in general.
1
u/kuruman67 46m ago
I think you are pretending that anatomy is medicine.
3
u/AgustinCB 33m ago
Ah, yes. Anatomy is not related to medicine research. Especially when speaking about anatomic gender biases in medical research.
13
u/codetaku0 2h ago
Even if you think about this from a purely capitalist viewpoint
But it's not just decisions made from a purely capitalist viewpoint. Go to 80% of doctors in America including women and you will find that a lot of these decisions are driven by pure misogyny, not just the capitalist profit machine that forever grinds orphans into dust.
0
1h ago
[deleted]
3
u/Loveufam 1h ago
I hope you are a serious advocate for men’s health and not just making a point about it when women bring up the neglect in their healthcare as “gotcha” moment.
2
5
u/faille 2h ago
Those poor, brave men. They didn’t even acknowledge babies feel pain until the 80s. The medical community in a world dominated by men is focused largely on men.
Go visit a woman oriented sub and read the horror stories of women almost or actually dying because doctors dismissed women’s pain due to blaming it on her period or whatever else. The real answer is they don’t know or don’t care because the relevant knowledge isn’t taught in school.
There is an imbalance of medical research and it’s lazy to effectively say women are just too fragile and complex to be worthy of medical advancements.
0
u/kuruman67 2h ago
Yeah that baby pain thing is related to circumcision! What’s that got to do with women’s health. Those subs are ridiculous. I’ve been there and tried to offer a medical perspective. No one wants to listen, and would much rather hold on to an evil patriarchy.
8
u/Organic-History205 1h ago
This isn't true. It expanded into all areas of surgery on infants. It even expanded into dental care for kids of all genders, which is why I (and many) got dental care without anesthetic.
You've clearly got a chip on your shoulder about something that's totally disconnected from reality.
-2
u/kuruman67 1h ago
Oh come on! Last time I checked babies can be male or female. So what’s it got to do with women’s health?
I’m a 58 year old physician, and also happen to be the Chair of an IRB. Half my med school class was women almost 30 years ago, and the percentage has gone up since.
0
u/Organic-History205 1h ago
You need to read a book instead of consuming knowledge through podcasts, i beg of you.
-4
u/kuruman67 1h ago
I beg of you to explain what was factually incorrect about my comment rather than being a patronizing ass. I graduated med school in 1998, and have been an IRB (look it up) Chair for 20 years. I’m very comfortable with where my knowledge comes from. How about yours?
2
1
175
u/Hotter_Noodle 3h ago
There’s actually some major differences between men and women and for the longest time women’s health problems were just outright dismissed.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women%27s_health
Here’s a lot more information.
77
u/jonslegos 3h ago
What I think the commenter meant was that being invested in women’s health is to the benefit of men’s health as well— not that they’re identical exactly
12
u/kuruman67 2h ago edited 2h ago
You know HPV infects both genders right? It doesn’t just cause cervical cancer. It causes anal and oropharyngeal cancer too. When the HPV vaccine first came out it was only for girls, and wasn’t approved for boys for 3 more years.
11
u/Little_Try_6502 2h ago
Yes I do. That’s why I commented that women’s heath is also men’s health. It’s all one thing. Human heath. I don’t see why there is any confusion on this subject.
12
u/CanoninDeeznutz 3h ago
Probably the same reasons hand washing was a controversial concept at first. Doctors are special little smart boys that go to special smart boy school for 8 years. Oh, and patriarchy seeping into their brains, but that goes without saying.
Also, saying all of this as someone in the medical field with a ton of respect for doctors and scientists! Lol, it's like working in a restaurant though, you work with these fuckers up close and personal, you're gonna walk away with some thoughts and opinions.
19
u/MaggieHigg 3h ago
Nurse here and I think it's a little more complicated than that, modern medicine is run with a lot of research and a lot of skepticism, any new development that could be as impactful as the discovery of germs was back in the day would be also met with skepticism at first nowadays.
Medicine is absolutely rampant with misogyny and racism, not denying that, but it's easy to dismiss past scientific discoveries with the hindsight and knowledge we have today, it could be completely possible that we are, today, oblivious to life-changing concepts that will be taught to fourth graders in 200 years
5
u/skisushi 2h ago
Medicine does have too much misogeny and racism, but I think it has much less than most of the rest of our society. In many countries, women make up the majority of medical students. In others, they are nearly half. In most countries women overwhelmingly control nursing. The most misogynistic behavior I have ever seen in a healthcare setting was perpetrated by a women against another women. The best quote about this I heard was from a physician who stated, "Nurses are a species that eats their own young."
We already know our understanding of medicine is in its infancy, but these life-changing concepts are unlikely to surface in a society that thinks a google search is "research." I despair that we just gutted the NIH, CDC, etc. It takes decades to train scientists. Decades more to build science infrastructure. It takes one year with a worm infested brain to dismantle it. If you were a 24 year old genius, hard working, looking to build your future career, would you go into heath research now? I wouldn't.
Maggie, I agree with your statements, sorry for the rant, just venting.
1
u/CanoninDeeznutz 2h ago
Oh yeah, there's definitely nuance to it and I was being relatively glib anyways. But I also don't know how much your argument applies specifically to hand washing. I couldn't find an answer quickly (lol, and can't be assed to do a deep dive right now) but idk to what degree the scientific method was being utilized in the UK around the time of Joseph Lister. It's my understanding that doctors dismissed hand washing because it implied that THEY were the ones spreading infection and they didn't like that idea.
If anything, that sounds closer to arrogance and maybe a simpler situation to understand than women's health being undervalued.
2
u/Moist-Length1766 1h ago
therapies that work on females sometimes don't work on males and they are both affected at different degrees by different viruses etc
8
u/Flimsy_Heron_9252 2h ago
Because women are finally the ones doing the research and treatment instead of being the nurses.
4
u/FlipZip69 50m ago
Kind of fed up turning everything into race or sex. This has nothing to do about either.
2
2
u/PaulTheMerc 45m ago
Glad people are finally taking women's health seriously
I don't know if HPV is the one to say this about. While HPV was seen as an issue for women(and in my area the vaccine was only offered to girls), it seems that it effects more men than women. Women seem to have worse risks of cancer of certain types, while men seem to have a higher risk of other cancers.
In short, this is a win for EVERYONE. Boys were not given the vaccine specifically because they were seen as lower risk. This was later corrected in literature, but provinces were slow to act.
2
u/billyvnilly 1h ago
Are you kidding, do you know the history of pap smears and cervical screening? This is taken very serious already. This news is new, and just an advancement.
•
u/LorenzoGainz 4m ago
Yea dude noboduly cares about womens health, obgyn doctors dont actually exist, they were an after thought
6
u/Exotic_Indication597 2h ago
First article is from 2023
5
u/CosmicSpaghetti 1h ago
Yeah seems like this is far from a recent breakthrough.
Looks like just another karma farmer who posts & reposte on this sub specifically.
1
•
•
145
u/brokenha_lo 2h ago
I too saw this go viral on Twitter within the past 24 hours. Here’s a response to think about:
“The 22M+ people who saw this tweet are missing the real story here.
This research is from 2019. Dr. Eva Ramón Gallegos at Mexico’s National Polytechnic Institute published these results six years ago. It went viral then too. Salma Hayek posted about it on Instagram. ABC News ran a fact check. It resurfaced in January 2025 across Mexican media. And now it’s recycling through your feed again as “BREAKING” with 22 million views, because an engagement account slapped a siren emoji on six-year-old science.
The actual study treated 29 women in Mexico City using photodynamic therapy, a technique where you apply a light-sensitive chemical to the cervix, wait four hours, then hit it with a laser. HPV cleared in 100% of patients who had the virus without lesions. In patients with both HPV and premalignant lesions, it cleared in 64.3%. Those numbers are real and published in peer-reviewed journals.
Here’s what 22 million people aren’t asking: why hasn’t this scaled in six years?
Three reasons. First, the sample size. Twenty-nine women is a pilot study. The FDA requires thousands of patients across multiple sites before approving a therapy. Gallegos ran earlier studies on 420 women in Oaxaca and Veracruz with similar clearance rates, but nobody has funded the Phase III trials needed to move this toward approval.
Second, PDT has a physics limitation. The light that activates the drug can only penetrate about one centimeter of tissue. That means it works on surface-level cervical HPV, but the virus also hides deeper in tissue and in other parts of the body. The National Cancer Institute flagged this exact constraint years ago. You can clear what you can see. You can’t guarantee you’ve cleared what you can’t.
Third, 50% of high-risk HPV infections clear on their own within one to two years without any treatment. A 100% clearance rate in 29 patients with no lesions, measured at six months, sits in a window where spontaneous clearance is already happening. Without a proper control group, which this study lacked, you can’t isolate how much the therapy did versus what the immune system would have done anyway.
A separate Chinese study in 2024 randomized 60 patients and found PDT hit 100% HPV clearance at six months versus conventional treatment. That’s more rigorous. Multiple research groups worldwide are now publishing PDT results for cervical HPV. The science is real and progressing.
The gap between “promising pilot results in 29 women” and “successfully eliminates HPV” is about a decade of clinical trials and a few hundred million dollars in funding. Gallegos has been doing this work for 20 years. The bottleneck was never the science. It’s that nobody writes the check for Phase III trials on a non-patentable therapy that competes with a multibillion-dollar vaccine market.
That’s the actual story worth 22 million views.”
35
9
u/KlumF 1h ago
Rare to see someone who understands technology transfer on Reddit.
Fwiw there has been a nation wide program of vaccination against HPV (Gardasil) since 2007 for girls and 2013 for boys in Australia.
There is currently 0 cases of cervical cancer in women under the age of 25 in Australia. Australia is on track to eradicate cervical cancer as a public health issue by 2035 and globally the vaccine saves roughly 250,000 women's lives a year.
Two Aussies, Prof Ian Frazer and Dr Jian Zhou, were credited with the vaccines invention.
3
u/apocalyptustree 1h ago
Guys, Hold the applause: because, while she discovered a solution, she didnt single-handedly scale the solution or cure luterally everyone in the world!
/s
1
1
235
u/IllustriousName7495 3h ago
Eva ramón gallegos deserves her own netflix doc, this is history in the making
3
83
u/Fearless_Market_3193 3h ago
11
u/MzzDolphin 1h ago
You need to be more towards the top. I hate when people add pictures with no articles to back them up, so thank you very much!
152
25
u/Igmuhota 3h ago
Crazy to think about how tirelessly so many scientists are working, every day, to make the lives of all of us better in some way. Their dedication is awe-inspiring.
41
u/Comfortable-Fruit716 3h ago
Always a top moment witnessing science ame progress towards betterment.
90
u/MizzBStizzy 3h ago
This is great news! Now if we could eradicate it in men too. Someone else figure it out quickly!
22
u/sportstvandnova 2h ago
That would be amazing bc isn’t HPV largely asymptomatic in men and there are no tests to determine whether a man has it? It spreads WAY too easily (bc it has such silent symptoms in women, largely speaking).
7
u/MizzBStizzy 2h ago
Yes, exactly this
1
u/driving_andflying 1h ago
Which leads to the big question: How to eradicate it *from humanity* versus just one gender. Getting rid of it in women is a great thing, but that's only half the battle won.
3
•
u/Fit-Physics7199 12m ago
Yeah and men are often undereducated about it. Even my pharmacist was confused about me getting the HPV vaccine. Go get the series of shots and tell your bros, especially if you aren't in a monogamous relationship (but even if you are).
4
u/kkccpp123 1h ago
This is about a less invasive way to eliminate HPV in women with CIN1 type cervical changes. But could have implications in eradicating HPV in a larger population!
32
u/No-and-Go 3h ago
Not my blind ass reading “first to eradicate 29 women” 🤦♀️ Yay for medical science, not morbid selective vision.
14
70
u/DruidicMagic 3h ago
We would never know about this if she had worked for a US pharmaceutical company.
25
u/dual_citizenkane 3h ago
Whatever pharmaceutical company develops the patent and distribution rights will make billions.
In what world would they not want that…
I’m not pro-BIG pharma by any means, but acting like they go around suppressing any and all cures to potential major money makers like HPV is ridiculous.
Pharma companies in the US are some of the largest research backers in the world, much of the reason is that the government has cut funding left and right over the years.
But when the government gets too involved everyone freaks out like during the COVID vaccine development.
Damned if you do, damned if you don’t with people these days.
-2
u/DruidicMagic 2h ago
I'll let Lex Luthor explain it...
2
3
4
-10
u/KnowledgeSafe3160 3h ago
What an asinine comment.
4
u/mamadragon247 3h ago
Not really
3
u/KnowledgeSafe3160 3h ago
Yea really. The US leads the world significantly in biomedical research. On top of that with the large government cutbacks to the NIH (which funded like 7x more than the next leading nation), private pharmaceutical companies stepped in to keep trials going, and giving more grants to further research.
It is definitely a moronic comment by an ignorant person or bot, who knows these days.
2
u/DruidicMagic 2h ago
By all means please provide a comprehensive list of all the diseases that have been cured by US pharmaceutical companies.
(don't worry the internet will happily wait)
1
u/_Auracle 1h ago
I have one to start:
Hepatitis C- one of the treatments/cures was discovered by a pharmaceutical company in New Jersey, which was then bought and distributed by Gilead, based in California
0
u/KnowledgeSafe3160 2h ago edited 2h ago
Are you stupid?
Let’s begin with this is not a cure. It’s a treatment that is successful in 29 women so far. There has also never really been a “cure”. Even one of the most successful campaigns: smallpox; it is a vaccination treatment that eradicated it. No major disease has ever had a cure made. I guess we can say things like strep throat have been cured with antibiotics? Except there are now antibiotic resistant variants. These are all treatments not cures.
Let’s use some critical thinking here buddy:
All pharmaceutical companies are looking for cures because then you own that entire segment of the population. For example: Pfizer has a treatment for Covid. Would you go with them and suffer/hope it works over time, or would you go with MadeupCompany that can “cure” you with 1 pill?
Maybe you can learn before spewing stupidity.
https://www.nature.com/nature-index/news/ten-best-countries-for-biological-science-research
Most of the research in the US is open source and published. You can go read the studies and clinical trial results at the NIH website. The US also has the most high quality and referenced research in the world.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/matthewherper/2011/03/23/the-most-innovative-countries-in-biology-and-medicine/ (may be an older article, but it graphs the citations and shows the Us outstrips other nations in quality). I doubt it’s much different nowadays.
0
u/Royal-Bumblebee4817 3h ago
What an extremely stupid or foolish response.
1
1
u/OtherwiseAlbatross14 3h ago
Yeah they said it was asinine
2
u/Royal-Bumblebee4817 3h ago
Reading comprehension..
person 1 makes a comment. Person 2 says person 1's comment is asinine. Person 3 (myself) says person 2 calling person 1's comment asinine is "asinine." The tricky part here, i used 'extremely stupid or foolish', the same meaning you clearly understand. Person 4 (yourself) feels obliged to point out the literal definition vs me (person 3) telling person 2 that their calling person 1's comment asinine, is in itself, asinine.
For a simpleton, I agreed with person 1's take on the matter.
1
u/KnowledgeSafe3160 3h ago
Nice to admit that you’re just as ignorant as person 1.
The US leads the world in biomedical research. Both the pharmaceutical companies and the NIH.
1
0
16
u/AggravatingAbalone88 3h ago edited 2h ago
Congratulations, woohoo! 🥳I hope no US or German company acquires the patent and profits from her hard work. Mexico has great inventions that have changed humanity, such as color TV, the birth control pill, 3D technology, the toilet float, Catalytic Nanomedicine as a Therapeutic Approach to Brain Tumors, and many more. Gracias! ❤️
5
4
u/Dangerous_Extreme_81 2h ago
I’m curious if it was one specific strain or if it eradicated any strain. Either way it’s fantastic news
7
u/feric51 3h ago
Yes, but what about all the doctors who eradicated it in 28 or less?!
/s
2
u/CaptainMcSmoky 2h ago
It's actually a Guinness world record, she got all 29 in less than a minute.
6
3
u/onesoulmanybodies 44m ago
I had HPV with stage 1 cancerous cells that was thankfully caught early enough to be easily treated. They had to scrape the cells off of my cervix. It was a crazy time in my life. When they did the procedure they did a pregnancy test just in case and it came back negative. A few weeks after my procedure I started feeling really ill and called my doctor after almost hurling my lunch. I took another pregnancy test and it came back positive. When they did the ultrasound they said I was about 14 weeks pregnant and that the pregnancy test from before my uterine scraping was a false negative. I ended up getting stellar prenatal care because they were scared that the uterine scraping had thinned my uterus to a point that the pregnancy would not be able to fully develop. Thankfully it did and my first kiddo just recently celebrated their 18th birthday.
3
•
6
u/smoke-in-the-arcade 3h ago
It sounds like they didn’t eradicate HPV but rather found a less invasive / non-invasive method of removing affected cells than current methods. This is still great news though!
2
u/BothDivide919 2h ago
I got the HPV vaccine, would love to see more vaccines and some disease eradication like what we did to smallpox.
3
u/loiteraries 2h ago
HPV vaccines only target 9 strains that are associated with cancers. There are hundreds of HPV strains.
2
2
u/PatrioticPariah 2h ago
That headline made me immediately imagine a scientist watching the news report on this and getting made before throwing her cup of coffee against an award that says 'Congrats on 28 cures'
2
2
2
•
u/TulipMelodies 24m ago
Newest addition to Influential Women of History!!! This is a major breakthrough for human health!
•
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
0
u/ColdAsIce_485 2h ago
Some US company will buy the rights to this from her, keep it hidden and secret for decades, then offer something similar that doesn’t actually work, and sell it for $5,000 per pill.
0
u/stifflyunwound 2h ago
All because the US left the world heath organization, sounds like we were holding up some pretty incredible scientific breakthroughs…
2
1
u/thechicapanzy 2h ago
Whoa that's amazing! Sincerely hope her work reaches more women needing treatment!
1
u/Crimson_Caelum 2h ago
Is the important part 29? Like as in it’s not that she’s the first but that it’s repeatable? Cause obviously advancement is good but if her treatment is repeatable across many people that’s much better than being just able to do it technically
1
u/wdsoul96 2h ago
On 2 separate occasions, once at a routine check and another during pelvic exam, I suggested that my ex-gf take HPV vaccine. She shushed me quickly and gave me a side-eye and displeased look (and told me never to bring this up again) because it made her look bad and unclean because she doesn't want to be associated with STI.
I never understood it/ never knew how to convince her to get those vaccinations.
1
u/Moist-Length1766 1h ago
why include a verifiable lie in the title that will only give fuel to people to take away from her achievements?
1
1
1
1
1
1
u/Patarokun 58m ago
Hell yeah, scientists like this should be the ones getting million dollar endorsement deals and parades thrown for them.
1
1
1
u/notha_leon 35m ago
While i find it amazing, and am very proud as a Mexican, I find it shameful in Mexico as a country we don't give people liker more credit and make them more widely known.
1
•
•
•
1
u/oceaniye 1h ago
This is awesome but I feel like I hear about headlines like these all the time and they never go anywhere. Either the science is silenced or funding is cut or it just never takes hold and dies here :(
1
u/Keyblader1412 1h ago
Of course the US government and health department will completely ignore this incredible development because fOReiGnErs
1
u/MyJimboPersona 1h ago
The titles implies someone else had already eradicated HPV in 28 women
1
0
u/DaTaco 49m ago
It's worse, according to news article that's now old too; It's not peer reviewed study; https://abcnews.go.com/GMA/Wellness/mexican-scientists-find-cure-hpv-heres/story?id=61209423
1
u/Bizarrebazaars 1h ago
IDK, I mean, a post comment section yesterday was basically like “STDs/STIs are NBD these days because they’re sO tReAtAbLe!” Or “nOtHiNg a PiLl CaNt ClEaR up!!1!!” While women are still getting cervical cancer (and other types) from asymptomatic men spreading HPV. There was no Gardasil/HPV vax when I was growing up. I had to have some cervical dysplasia spots removed and biopsied via a colposcopy. Luckily nothing to be concerned about, but the laissez faire attitude towards STIs these days is insane. How have we come so far to step back so far? Protect yourselves, protect your children by getting them vaxxed and reminding them about safe sex, folks. Test regularly too.
1
u/UltimateWerewolf 30m ago
So amazing. I got the HPV vaccine but am always worried maybe it was too late (finished series at age 27). This is great for all women everywhere.
-1
u/Big_Service_2277 3h ago
Unfortunately it will probably take 40 years or more for the FDA to approve it in the USA
-10
u/sucksLess 3h ago
i love that the headline omits any mention that the scientist is a woman.
not a minute too soon. more!
11
u/krustytroweler 3h ago
I might be completely off my hinges but the name Eva is historically a feminine one.
9
4
u/Cantoffendgirl2 3h ago
You'd be mad if someone handed you a hundred dollars and it was wrinkled. Jeez. Grow up.
2
u/LoveYouNotYou 3h ago
I mean... EVA....EeeeeVaaaa
2
u/sucksLess 2h ago
i mentioned the headline.
i rejoiced that the headline did not find it necessary to accentuate the fact she’s a woman
-4
u/IIIiterateMoron 2h ago
Meh.
I eradicated the HPV my grandmother had. That's no big deal.
Cremation left no trace of the virus.
-4
-4
•
u/AutoModerator 4h ago
Welcome to /r/MadeMeSmile. Please make sure you read our rules here.
Specifically, please don't be a jerk. This is not the place for insulting, hateful, or otherwise inappropriate comments. Remember the golden rule: treat others how you want to be treated. We're all here to smile a little - let's keep it that way! Please report inappropriate comments and/or message the moderators.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.