Vaccination with vector type vaccines – is it worth the risk? “To jab, or not to jab, is that the question?”

Main Article Content

Ben J.M. Ale David H. Slater Des N.D. Hartford

Abstract

COVID-19 has the potential to re-frame the whole debate about individual and societal risk, risk balancing, benefit-cost analysis, individual rights, societal responsibilities of individuals and responsibilities of Governments within the overall context that there are limits to what can be achieved in particular instances, and in totality across society.


There has been considerable discussion and debate globally about the real and perceived risks of having a vaccination against COVID-19. This might be interpreted as having contributed to the uncertainty in the vaccine debate and contributed to doubt and even erosion of trust in some of the population. Some of this has been due to an understandable demand for immediate answers, before the necessary and detailed data were available and verified. The recent publication of unexpected negative side effects from the Astra Zeneca version of the vector-type vaccine, “vaccine induced prothrombotic immune thrombocytopenia” (VIPIT), has been the latest complicating development, which has caused further concerns, uncertainties and confusion.


The risk figures that Governments use are derived from whole population data and processed to give a smeared out average “societal” risk. But to the individuals having to make the choice, these figures may, or may not, be relevant.


The corresponding societal estimate of an individual’s chance of being stuck by lightning is the well-known 1 in a million. But individuals know intuitively that for someone who never goes out in bad weather, this is way too high. Conversely someone who goes out to fly a kite in a thunderstorm has an almost certain chance of being fried.


In this paper we discuss the current arguments put forward, which accept the 1 in a 100,000 as acceptable collateral damage for societal exposure. It then contrasts them against the numbers that could be derived, if it is approached from the point of view of a particular individual’s risk benefit calculations. Subsequently we discuss how communication and information by policy makers and media may influence the decisions of individuals to have or not have themselves vaccinated.  While the current debate about vaccinations provides data and the central focus of this paper, the issue is a general matter, it is symptomatic of a much wider risk question which the vaccine debate has brought into focus; and not just for other vaccines and medical interventions.

Article Details

How to Cite
ALE, Ben J.M.; SLATER, David H.; HARTFORD, Des N.D.. Vaccination with vector type vaccines – is it worth the risk?. Medical Research Archives, [S.l.], v. 9, n. 6, june 2021. ISSN 2375-1924. Available at: <https://esmed.org/MRA/mra/article/view/2478>. Date accessed: 14 aug. 2022. doi: https://doi.org/10.18103/mra.v9i6.2478.
Section
Research Articles

References

CDC (2021) Vaccine Effectiveness: How Well Do the Flu Vaccines Work?, https://www.cdc.gov/flu/vaccines-work/vaccineeffect.htm (Accessed 16-04-2021)
Zulli, A., Husaric, M., de Courten, M., Apostolopoulos, V., (2021), What-is-thrombocytopenia-the-rare-blood-condition-possibly-linked-to-the-astrazeneca-vaccine, The conversation https://theconversation.com/what-is-thrombocytopenia-the-rare-blood-condition-possibly-linked-to-the-astrazeneca-vaccine-158522 (Accessed 15-04-2021)
AD (2021) https://www.ad.nl/binnenland/en-weer-dreigt-vertraging-voor-de-vaccinatietrein ~a93c768f/ ?referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.nl%2F (Accessed 16-04-2021)
Marks, O., (2021) Joint CDC and FDA Statement on Johnson & Johnson COVID-19 Vaccine, 13-04-2014, https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/joint-cdc-and-fda-statement-johnson-johnson-covid-19-vaccine (Accessed 16-04-2016)
HSE (1988) Health and Safety Executive. Tolerability of Risk from Nuclear Power Stations, HMSO, Norwich, UK, ISBN 0-11-886368-1
HSE, (2001) Reducing Risks, Protecting People, HMSO, Norwich, UK ISBN 0-7176 21251 0 (available at https://www.hse.gov.uk/risk/theory/r2p2.pdf, Accessed 16-04-2021)
Kok,M., Jongejan, R.,, Nieuwjaar,M., Tanczos, I, Fundamentals of flood protection, ISBN 9789089021601, https://puc.overheid.nl/rijkswaterstaat/doc/PUC_155243_31/ (Accessed 16-04-2021
USACE (2019) US Army Corps of Engineers, Engineering and Construction Bulletin No. 2019-15. Issuing Office: CECW-EC Issued: 08 Oct 19; Expires: 08 Oct 21.
Fauci, (2021) https://www.bbc.com/news/av/health-56731430
Ale, B.J.M., Hartford, D.N.D., Slater, D.H. (2021) Wider Implications of Risk Decisions in a Pandemic, Proceedings of the 31th European Safety and Reliability Conference Edited by Bruno Castanier, Marko Cepin, David Bigaud and Christophe Berenguer Copyright ©2021 by ESREL2021 Organizers. Published by Research Publishing, Singapore ISBN: 981-973-0000-00-0; doi: 10.3850/981-973-0000-00-0 esrel2021-paper (in press)
Helsoot, I. (2020) Expert-reflectie ten behoeve van Lessons Learned COVID-19, https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwiQntiVwILwAhWRHRQKHY48DrcQFjAAegQIBhAD&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rijksoverheid.nl%2Fbinaries%2Frijksoverheid%2Fdocumenten%2Fpublicaties%2F2020%2F08%2F31%2Fdocumenten-lessons-learned-corona-position-papers-generieke-lockdownmaatregelen%2F04%2BHelsloot%2BPP%2BEGL.pdf&usg= AOvVaw1p-XNR7XH-epUJO9JqER8g (Accessed 16-04-2021)
Boyton R.J., Altmann, D.M. (2021) Risk of SARS-CoV-2 reinfection after natural infection, The Lancet, Vol 397 March 27, 2021
Hunter, P.R., Colón, F.J.,González, Brainard, J., Rushton, S. (2020) Impact of non-pharmaceutical interventions against COVID-19 in Europe: A quasi-experimental study medRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.05.01.20088260 (Accessed 14-04-2021)
Ioannidis J.P.A. (2021) Reconciling estimates of global spread and infection fatality rates of COVID-19: an overview of systematic evaluations, European Journal of Clinical Investigation, https://doi.org/10.1111/eci.13554 (Accessed 14-04-2021)
Vo, Lam Thuy (2021) These Charts Break Down Who Is Most At Risk Of Dying From The Coronavirus, BuzzFeed News https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/denmark-ditches-oxford-astrazeneca-vaccine-bjsq3bbj8?utm_source=newsletter&utm_campaign=newsletter_101&utm_medium=email&utm_content=101_12960880&CMP=TNLEmail_7172239_12960880_101 (Accessed 15-04-2021)
CBS (2021) https://www.cbs.nl/nl-nl/nieuws/2021/04/bijna-169-duizend-mensen-overleden-in-2020-10-procent-meer-dan-verwacht (as per 16-04-2021)
Van Dissel, J. (2021) COVID-19 2e Kamer-briefing 24 febr 2021. https://www.tweedekamer.nl/debat_en_vergadering/commissievergaderingen/details?id=2021A01206
WHO (2021) Statement of the WHO Global Advisory Committee on Vaccine Safety (GACVS) COVID-19 subcommittee on safety signals related to the AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine, https://www.who.int/news/item/19-03-2021-statement-of-the-who-global-advisory-committee-on-vaccine-safety-(gacvs)-covid-19-subcommittee-on-safety-signals-related-to-the-astrazeneca-covid-19-vaccine (Accessed 16-04-2021)
EMA (2021) COVID-19 Vaccine AstraZeneca: benefits still outweigh the risks despite possible link to rare blood clots with low blood platelets, https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/news/covid-19-vaccine-astrazeneca-benefits-still-outweigh-risks-despite-possible-link-rare-blood-clots (Accessed 16-04-2021)
Moody, O (2021) Denmark ditches Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine, The Times, https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/denmark-ditches-oxford-astrazeneca-vaccine-bjsq3bbj8?utm_source=newsletter&utm_campaign=newsletter_101&utm_medium=email&utm_content=101_12960880&CMP=TNLEmail_7172239_12960880_101 (Accessed 15-04-2021)
Mellers, B.A., Schwartz, A., and Cooke, A.D.J (1998) Judgment and Decision-making, Annu. Rev. Psychol. 49:447-77. Annual Reviews Inc.
Ale, B.J.M., Hartford, D.N.D., Slater, D.H. (2018) The practical value of a life: priceless, or a CBA calculation? Medical Research Archive, vol. 6, issue 3, KEI Journals
Picard, A. (2021) https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-we’ve-lost-our-ability-to-put-risk-in-perspective-when-it-comes-to/ (Accessed 16-04-2021)
Wildavsky, A. Dake, K. (1990). Theories of Risk Perception: Who Fears What and Why? Daedalus Vol.119, No. 4, Risk. pp 41-60. MIT press on behalf of the American Academy of Arts & Sciences