Topic > The Pros and Cons of the Oral Polio Vaccine - 709

Diseases can affect populations and regions around the world. However, low-income countries are most affected due to a lack of capacity and training to address these challenges. Similarly, polio may not appear to be a problem in developed countries, but it remains endemic in many countries such as Afghanistan, Pakistan and Nigeria1. Oral polio vaccine (Sabin) or OPV is the vaccine of choice in such endemic areas due to simpler administration. Not only can it be easily administered, but it can also be dispensed by operators or volunteers without particular formal training2. Therefore, administration of OPV does not require a highly trained healthcare professional/nurse/doctor. Additionally, the oral polio vaccine is an inexpensive option. Unlike the inactivated polio vaccine (IPV)/Salk, the oral polio vaccine does not require sterile syringes. Additionally, OPV offers longer immunity coverage than IPV2. It will be worth mentioning that the OPV vaccine works by stimulating circulating antibodies and developing resistance to virus infection. For example, there is the possibility of an epidemic of vaccine-derived poliomyelitis (VDPV)2. In the past, OPV has been responsible for some vaccine-derived polio outbreaks. Additionally, OPV is not recommended for immunocompromised individuals or individuals 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 had already been effectively eliminated in these countries. In developing countries, the benefits of OPV far outweigh the risks associated with it, thus making it an ideal choice. However, in USA there is a changed scenario and polio is not endemic and to prevent any case of VDPV, it may be a safer option to administer it