When Should a Vaccine be Considered “Effective”
Arnold Solof, MD
I was just reviewing information on methods to prevent HIV infection. In a recent trial of a candidate vaccine, it was found to have “only” 30% efficacy in preventing HIV infection (so it was deemed not effective). The presenter was a world-recognized specialist in pediatric infectious diseases.
Upon hearing that I recalled numerous reports over the past few months stating that the Flu vaccine for the 2017-2018 season was only about 10% effective (note: more recent estimates are around 33% efficacy). Yet, the infectious disease specialists were recommending everyone get the Flu vaccine despite the believed 10% efficacy. Their position was “10% is better than zero”. I thought, Wow! 10%. Whoopie! I was having a hard time getting excited about that.
So, although both infections can kill you, given the choice, I’d take my chances with influenza before I would with HIV and I find it interesting how the efficacy assessments of these 2 scenarios seem reversed. I can’t help but think that in this case, the medical profession guilty of the same kind of prejudice we accuse our patients of when it comes to Flu vaccines. Did we stop and think before we spoke?
0 Comments