IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/hepoli/v124y2020i2p199-204.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The controversy on HPV vaccination in Japan: Criticism of the ethical validity of the arguments for the suspension of the proactive recommendation

Author

Listed:
  • Okita, Taketoshi
  • Enzo, Aya
  • Kadooka, Yasuhiro
  • Tanaka, Masashi
  • Asai, Atsushi

Abstract

The Human Papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine was integrated into Japan’s national immunization program (NIP) in April 2013. However, numerous instances of serious adverse reactions were widely reported in the media, resulting in the Ministry of Health, Labor, and Welfare (MHLW) suspending the official recommendation of the HPV vaccine on June 14, 2013. Investigating the reported incidents, the Vaccine Adverse Reactions Review Committee (VARRC)—an MHLW advisory committee—found no high-quality evidence supporting a causal relationship between the reported events and the HPV vaccination. However, rather than lifting the suspension, they have opted to maintain a “pseudo informed consent” confirming the perceptions of Japanese citizens regarding the vaccine. Accordingly, there appears to be a fundamental difference in the approach to vaccine policymaking between Japan (MHLW/VARRC) and other countries and the World Health Organization, which base policy decisions on the effectiveness and safety of the vaccine. Consequently, the arguments for the suspension of the HPV vaccine recommendation are not ethically appropriate. Relevant bodies must make a clear decision regarding the HPV vaccine and its status in the NIP: the proactive recommendation must either be reinstated or the HPV vaccine legal framework altered to rely entirely on voluntary individual decisions.

Suggested Citation

  • Okita, Taketoshi & Enzo, Aya & Kadooka, Yasuhiro & Tanaka, Masashi & Asai, Atsushi, 2020. "The controversy on HPV vaccination in Japan: Criticism of the ethical validity of the arguments for the suspension of the proactive recommendation," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 124(2), pages 199-204.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:hepoli:v:124:y:2020:i:2:p:199-204
    DOI: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2019.12.011
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0168851019303057
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.healthpol.2019.12.011?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    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:eee:hepoli:v:124:y:2020:i:2:p:199-204. 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: Catherine Liu or the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/healthpol .

    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.