If you knew that the most effective version of a vaccine also had a 1 and 2.4 million chance of becoming virulent, would you opt in or out? This question of balancing the efficacy of the Oral Polio Vaccine with its potential threat is the centerpiece of understanding poliomyelitis–commonly known as polio. As someone who has taken a few courses in statistics, the odds of infection associated with the OPV method seemed extremely promising. In this blog, I’ll provide some background explaining my initial opinion on the two vaccinations, then delve into why this opinion is one that ultimately contributes to the existence of polio around the world.
As stated previously, the allure behind that of OPV is its efficacy. Unlike the IPV, the OPV activates an individual’s immune system, enabling the mucosal layer of the digestive tract to limit the amount that poliomyelitis is replicated within and excreted from the individual. When first conceptualizing this vaccine, its unprecedented capacity to prevent the virulence of polio seemed like a simple choice. But, when reading further into the research discussing poliomyelitis across the world today, I understood what my initial draw towards the OPV preference was lacking. From a perspective emphasizing the vaccine success in one individual, the immune-reacting OPV seemed to be able to put up the best fight. But, when expanding the ultimate goal of the polio vaccine, it becomes evident that the strength of the fight in an individual’s system is less pertinent than the eradication of the disease worldwide.
The World Health Organization differentiates the inactivated polio virus (IPV) from the previously discussed OPV in a few manners. The most significant difference between these vaccine options lies in the very small potential that could come about if adhering to the OPV–the threat of virulence. When weighing this cost from a perspective larger than that of the individual person receiving the vaccine, I believe the need for a switched vaccination becomes obvious. Eradication, by definition, cannot be reached if the 1 out of 2.4 million vaccines is bringing polio about in communities that might not necessarily be affected by it otherwise. Although most of the time extremely effective in preventing polio’s transmission, this vaccine could potentially reintroduce the disease, setting back the push for herd immunity even further. Today, the presence of polio around the world tells the tail of an entity that’s disappearing, but not yet gone. Despite its rarity, the few nations’ that still see polio epidemics exemplify the truth that the small percent of those with the disease still do exist, contracting and transmitting polio to those also at risk. I believe, along with many US policy makers, that the best bet towards establishing herd immunity and eradicating polio, there should be a shift away from the OPV vaccine and towards the inactivated strand that is unable to produce its own virulence.
Kate's MCRO Journey 