The Pros And Cons Of Oral Polio Vaccine

Diseases can affect populations and regions throughout the world. However, the low-income countries are affected more due the lack of capacity and training to address these challenges. Similarly, polio may not seem an issue in the developed countries, yet it remains endemic in many countries such as s Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Nigeria1. Oral polio vaccine (Sabin) or OPV is the vaccine of preference in such endemic areas owing to easier administration. Not only can it be easily administered, but it can also be dispensed by workers or volunteers without much formal training2. Thus, OPV administration does not require a highly trained medical worker /nurse/physician. Moreover, oral polio vaccine is an inexpensive option. Unlike the Inactivated Polio Vaccine (IPV)/Salk, Oral Polio vaccine does not require sterile syringes. Furthermore, OPV offers a longer immunity coverage as compared to the IPV2. It will be pertinent to mention that the OPV vaccine functions by stimulating circulating antibodies and developing resistance to infection of the
For instance, there is a chance of an outbreak of vaccine-derived poliomyelitis (VDPV)2. In the past, OPV has been responsible for a few outbreaks of vaccine-derived polio. Moreover, OPV is not recommended for immunocompromised persons or individuals currently on immunosuppressant therapy. Due to of the risk as mentioned above of VDPV, in 2000, most European countries and United States discontinued using OPV and would only administer IPV2. Moreover, wild-type 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 the United States exists a changed scenario and polio is not endemic and to prevent any case of VDPV, it may be a safer option to administer