Comment by epcoa

> as a sibling commenter writes, well-studied cases of this are so rare that

And yet not a single cite in sight. A random commenter on orange site is not evidence

However I know the paper they are referring to - it is from 1999 in J Pathology, famous at the time, and it is woefully out of date.

> they’re below our sensitivity of detection/technical error rates.

Hogwash.

https://www.mdpi.com/2076-0817/14/7/668

> There are ways to do this, and, should they be attained, would be published in a reputable journal based on their novelty.

There are plenty of papers on HPV independent cervical cancer based on actual gene expression methods published in reputable journals in the last 30 years.