blog




  • Essay / The Pros and Cons of the Oral Polio Vaccine - 709

    Diseases can affect populations and regions around the world. However, low-income countries are more affected due to lack of capacity and training to address these challenges. Similarly, polio may not seem to be a problem in developed countries, but it remains endemic in many countries such as Afghanistan, Pakistan and Nigeria1. The oral polio vaccine (Sabin) or OPV is the preferred vaccine in these endemic areas due to its ease of administration. Not only can it be easily administered, but it can also be delivered by workers or volunteers without much formal training2. Thus, administration of OPV does not require highly trained medical/nursing/physician personnel. Additionally, the oral polio vaccine is an inexpensive option. Unlike inactivated polio vaccine (IPV)/Salk, oral polio vaccine does not require sterile syringes. Additionally, OPV provides longer immune coverage than IPV2. It will be pertinent to mention that OPV vaccine works by stimulating circulating antibodies and developing resistance to infection. For example, there is a risk of an outbreak of vaccine-derived poliomyelitis (VDPV)2. In the past, OPV has been responsible for some outbreaks of vaccine-derived polio. Additionally, OPV is not recommended for immunocompromised people or people currently on immunosuppressive therapy. Due to the above-mentioned risk of VDPV, in 2000, most European countries and the United States stopped using OPV and only administered IPV2. Furthermore, wild poliovirus has already been effectively eliminated in these countries. In developing countries, the benefits of OPV far outweigh the associated risks, making it an ideal choice. However, in the United States there is a different scenario and polio is not endemic and to prevent any cases of VDPV it may be safer to administer