IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/aph/ajpbhl/1988783296-300_7.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Polio immunization policy in the United States: A new challenge for a new generation

Author

Listed:
  • Salk, D.

Abstract

The primary reason that live poliovirus vaccine is recommended in the United States today is because it may immunize contacts who have not otherwise chosen to be vaccinated. This policy places contacts at risk of paralysis from an untested, unlicensed 'spread virus' vaccine and places infants at risk for an unproven, theoretical benefit to others, not themselves. The licensed killed poliovirus vaccine provides equivalent protection to those vaccinated, with no risk to recipients or contacts. The preceding analysis by Hinman, et al, is an interesting exercise in modeling, but many of their assumptions are open to question. Their sweeping conclusions are not justified by the type of analysis performed, which should yield an overall assessment of a decision environment not a single optimal choice. No measure of perceived social consequence of patient attitude is included, although this is of central importance today. Their report lends an aura of credibility to one conclusion, but this credibility is illusory at best. The major social issue today is not which vaccine to use, but how should polio immunization policy be evaluated.

Suggested Citation

  • Salk, D., 1988. "Polio immunization policy in the United States: A new challenge for a new generation," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 78(3), pages 296-300.
  • Handle: RePEc:aph:ajpbhl:1988:78:3:296-300_7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Raisa B. Deber & Vivek Goel, 1990. "Using Explicit Decision Rules to Manage Issues of Justice, Risk, and Ethics in Decision Analysis," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 10(3), pages 181-194, August.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:aph:ajpbhl:1988:78:3:296-300_7. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Christopher F Baum (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.apha.org .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.