Department of Veterinary Pathobiology, Purdue University, West Lafayette,
Indiana 47907, USA.
The following summarizes this author's current thoughts regarding veterinary
vaccines and their safety: 1. Every licensed animal vaccine is probably
effective, but also produces some adverse effects. 2. Prelicensing studies of
vaccines are not specifically designed to detect adverse vaccine reactions. 3.
An improved system of national postmarketing surveillance is required to
identify most adverse vaccine reactions that occur at low and moderate
frequency. 4. Even a good postmarketing surveillance system is unlikely,
however, to detect delayed adverse vaccine reactions, and the longer the delay
the less likely they will be associated with vaccination. 5. Analytic
epidemiologic (field) studies are the best way to link vaccination with delayed
adverse reactions, but these are often hindered by incomplete vaccination
histories in medical records in veterinary practice and by a lack of
veterinarians in industry trained in epidemiologic methods. 6. Each licensed
veterinary vaccine should be subjected to a quantitative risk assessment, and
these should be updated on a regular basis as new information becomes available.
7. Risk assessment should be used to identify gaps in information regarding the
safety and efficacy of vaccines, and appropriate epidemiologic studies conducted
to fill these gaps that contribute to the uncertainty in risk estimates. 8. Risk
assessment is an analytical process that is firmly based on scientific
considerations, but it also requires judgments to be made when the available
information is incomplete. These judgments inevitably draw on both scientific
and policy considerations. 9. Representatives from industry, government,
veterinary medicine, and the animal-owning public should be involved in risk
management, that is, deciding between policy options. The controversy regarding
vaccine risks is intensifying to the point that some animal owners have stopped
vaccinating their animals. They offer as justification the belief that current
vaccines are "just too dangerous." Some owners report that since they completely
stopped vaccinating their animals, they have been healthy. What they fail to
realize is that a high percentage of animal owners are responsible and do
vaccinate their animals, thus providing "herd immunity" protection to the
unvaccinated animals whom they contact. The solution to the vaccine controversy
is not to abandon vaccination as an effective means of disease prevention and
control, but rather to encourage vaccine research to answer important questions
regarding safety and to identify the biological basis for adverse reactions. Key
questions to be answered include these: What components of vaccines are
responsible for adverse reactions? What is the genetic basis for susceptibility
to adverse health effects in animals? How can susceptible individuals be
identified? Do multivalent vaccines cause a higher rate of adverse reactions
than monovalent vaccines? Is administration of multiple doses of monovalent
vaccines really any safer than administering a single multivalent vaccine? These
and other vaccine-related questions deserve our attention as veterinarians so we
can fulfill our veterinary oath to relieve animal suffering and "above all else,
do no harm."
Publication Types:
Review
Review, Tutorial
PMID: 9890055 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
ALL INFORMATION, DATA, AND
MATERIAL CONTAINED, PRESENTED, OR PROVIDED HERE IS FOR GENERAL INFORMATION
PURPOSES ONLY AND IS NOT TO BE CONSTRUED AS REFLECTING THE KNOWLEDGE OR OPINIONS
OF THE PUBLISHER, AND IS NOT TO BE CONSTRUED OR INTENDED AS PROVIDING MEDICAL OR
LEGAL ADVICE. THE DECISION WHETHER OR NOT TO VACCINATE IS AN IMPORTANT AND
COMPLEX ISSUE AND SHOULD BE MADE BY YOU, AND YOU ALONE, IN CONSULTATION WITH
YOUR HEALTH CARE PROVIDER.
Books,
LinkOut