Skip to main content

The Vaccine Conundrum

A vaccine developed and ready to be injected in less than one year is a miracle that no research laboratory or pharmaceutical company would have dreamed of before 2020 began. Their track record has been that Jonas Salk’s lightning-fast development of polio vaccine in less than 4 years, and Ebola vaccine was approved in December 2019 after the first Ebola incidence was found in 1976, i.e. more than 40 years after. 

From discovery to approved vaccination is a 10-year long process involving 2-5 years of discovery research, 2 years of pre-clinical period, 5 years of clinical development at its very best, 1-2 years of regulatory approval, and then of course comes in the manufacturer. The clinical development period has its 3 phases that is creating the buzz we hear day in and day out these days. Phase I is when researchers concentrate on the question, “Is it safe?” Phase II tries to establish whether the vaccine is activating an immune response or not. Then comes Phase III when they answer the all-important question whether it protects against the disease. The process is not over yet, because regulatory review and approval is going to take its own time. Finally then is the ball thrown into the Manufacturer’s court who has to produce it and despatch it to the user ends.    

The million dollar predicament before the denouement is whether it is ethical to deploy the Covid-19 vaccine(s) based on safety and immunogenicity data generated by phase-I and II clinical trials alone, without waiting for the crucial phase-III trials? Common adverse effects may not be missed by the phase I/II trials, but these trials are not sufficient to detect less common adverse effects. And the cases with less common adverse effects shall be large because a huge population is to be vaccinated. 

The answer is not straightforward, as many complexities are involved, say Vipin Vashishtha and Puneet Kumar in Indian Journal of Medical Ethics, published online on November 26, 2020. 

Besides, the safety confidence data from the young and healthy people cannot be extrapolated to the elderly population, pregnant mothers, and lactating mothers who have unique situations of their own.

The WHO says vaccination currently saves 2-3 million lives every year, but another 1.5 million deaths could be avoided if more people were vaccinated. The barriers to universal immunization are formidable, especially in less developed areas. In India, if we can achieve 25% of our population vaccinated in 3 to 5 years, it shall be a wonder. 

I leave you with sobering thought. How many shall die because of the vaccine-instigated health issues in short term and in long term? Is that number likely to be a lot smaller than what Covid19 is doing to us today?

***


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Whippet: the next big thing in cricket

Those who love the sport of cricket, love it with uncommon passion. They love everything about cricket: the nuances, the idiosyncrasies, the enigma called the pitch, the works. Until recently, the sport was played only in England and its erstwhile colonies; there wasn’t any exposure to the sport many countries around the world. The trouble with cricket has been its five-day duration with breaks for lunch, tea, and drinks. For most people, no matter what the sport, a game should reasonably end in an hour or two. This 5-day long rigmarole was plainly too arduous to hold much appeal. Still worse was the possibility that the game could very well end undecided—no winner, no loser, that is. Cricket was a hard sell to countries that did not have the sport in the DNA sequences of its people. It was a lot easier for old loyal within the British Commonwealth countries to get their younger lot excited about it, its dispersion beyond the countries’ boundaries was far more challenging. The spectato...
Post a Comment
Read more

Disruption for Common Good

The word ‘disruption’ didn’t stand for anything good until Clayton Christensen, in his famous 1995 article posted in the Harvard Business Review, repurposed it in a positive context. What exactly is disruption though? In business parlance, when an upstart, e.g. Uber takes on the limousine car market and then expands itself to take on taxis, and does it all through a simpler model and cheaper processes, it is disruptive innovation. In that respect disruptive innovation is just a strategy to help new entrants dislodge long-time incumbents. The success or failure of the strategy is reflected in the bottom line of the entrant’s financials. And disruption is no longer limited to products and services. It is eminently relevant to bringing about social change. Its success takes a long time to show up after successive hiccups that invite disapprovals. Today, what critical disruptions are needed in India?     First, all Indians need to be convinced that the people living on this l...
Post a Comment
Read more