Background/Aim: The Human Papilloma Virus (HPV) infection is the most common sexually transmitted disease and has been shown to cause cancer. Both sexes have a lifetime risk of at least 50% of exposure to HPV. Male HPV vaccinations can yield advantages for both the individual and community, including reduced transmission of HPV and protection of male and female health. The approval of vaccinations is mainly influenced by parental perspectives on this matter. It is essential to examine the subject in terms of physicians, who have the highest knowledge about HPV in society. This cross-sectional study aims to investigate physicians' attitudes and knowledge about vaccinating their male children against the human papillomavirus. Methods: A total of 1670 physicians were included in this study. Working as a physician and having a son were determined as inclusion criteria. A digital questionnaire was given to the physicians participating in the study. The answers to the survey questions were rated on a 4-point Likert scale (agree, do not know, disagree, strongly disagree). The responses were compared with the variables, and statistical analysis was performed. Results: Of the physicians participating in the study, 34.4% were male and 65.6% were female. A small percentage of the physicians (6.2%) reported that they would vaccinate their boys against HPV, and 59.9% of them indicated that they would not but they would consider it. The physicians’ who were most likely to vaccinate their sons worked in the fields of radiology (97.3%), orthopedics (80%), and gynecology (78.8%). It was determined that the physicians who said they would never have their sons vaccinated against HPV were most frequently specialists in anesthesiology and reanimation, infectious diseases, and clinical microbiology. Conclusions: This study determined that physicians in some specialties hesitated to give the HPV vaccine to their sons. The HPV vaccine is crucial for boys, and it is essential to point out the significance of providing seminars to physicians, particularly in developing nations like Turkey, regarding this issue and its consequences.

Background and Objectives: Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (T2DM) is a metabolic disease caused by the failure of the skeletal muscle, liver and adipose tissue to respond to insulin. Metformin is the first choice for the treatment of T2DM. Isthmin 1 (Ism1) is a newly discovered adipokine that affects all carbohydrate, lipid and protein metabolism. This study examines the changes in serum and salivary levels of Ism1 in patients using metformin, considering its potential as a follow-up marker for T2DM if present in the salivary glands. Materials and Methods: The study included 30 newly diagnosed T2DM patients and 30 non-diabetic controls. Ism1 was measured by ELISA in serum and saliva after 3 months and compared with routine biochemical parameters. Immunostaining of Ism1 was performed in salivary glands. Results: Ism1 was immunohistochemically detected in salivary glands for the first time. Serum Ism1 levels increased significantly after 3 months of metformin treatment (p = 0.028). The increase in salivary Ism1 levels did not reach statistical significance. Fasting plasma glucose (FPG) (p < 0.001), HbA1c (p < 0.001) and LDL (p = 0.015) levels decreased with metformin. There was a significant negative correlation between the increase in Ism1 levels and the decrease in LDL levels (rho = −0.362, p = 0.05). Conclusions: Despite its first detection in salivary glands, the hypothesis that Ism1 may be a surveillance marker in T2DM could not be confirmed. The negative correlation of Ism1 with LDL levels suggests that Ism1 may contribute to the ameliorative effect of metformin on serum lipids. Further studies are needed to support this conclusion.