A social media message from the Canadian Cancer Society was just brought to my attention. As a cancer researcher, I like to try to stay abreast of developments in this area. I highly recommend screening to achieve early detection of cancers. The earlier a cancer is detected, the better the prognosis. However, I am genuinely confused by this message…
Here is the full message.
At first, I thought that I must be holding onto an outdated definition of what a trans woman is. It was my understanding that a trans woman is biologically a male who self-identifies as a woman. But this would not make sense, because a biological male does not have a cervix and, therefore, any recommendation for screening for cervical cancer in a trans woman would be that they do not require this particular screening because they do not have a cervix.
It is my understanding that trans women can have what is essentially a tunnel surgically implemented into their groin area. But, it is also my understanding that these ‘tunnels’ are not seeded with any cells that are specific to cervical tissue. As such, it would seem to be a misnomer to call any cancer that develops in this ‘tunnel’ a cervical cancer. Cervical cancers typically arise from cells that are unique to a biologically genuine cervix.
So, in a state of great confusion, I searched for definitions of “trans woman”. I was hoping that the definition might have been expanded to include individuals who had a biologically natural cervix. Then I could understand this messaging from the Canadian Cancer Society. However, the multiple definitions that I found were all in agreement with my previous understanding. For example, here is one of the definitions…
“trans woman or trans–wom·an, trans·wom·an [ trans-w oom- uhn, tranz ] noun an adult who was assigned male at birth but whose gender identity is female“
So, it seems that I did have a proper grasp on the definition. So, this still leaves me extremely confused by this statement from the Canadian Cancer Society. I don’t understand how a biological male can have any risk of cervical cancer.
Perhaps they mean that trans women with surgical tunneling of their groin should be screened for internal epithelial/skin cancers??? If so, these should not be referred to as cervical cancers; they are biologically distinct.
I am not convinced that cancers that might develop in a ‘neo-cervix’ would be equivalent to genuine cervical cancers. I’m fairly certain that prognoses and responses to standard treatments would likely differ. And it would probably be important to let a pathologist know whether a sample has been taken from a genuine versus neo-cervix, or they could get very confused when looking through their microscope to assist with a diagnoses.
But I am open to correction on any of my biological understandings here.
I am not being facetious. As a scientist, I am genuinely open to advancing my understanding of biology. So, if any readers see how my thinking is incorrect, I would ask that you post your proposed correction(s) in the comments section.
I will follow the science.
**Source: I Am Very Confused – by Dr. Byram W. Bridle