A tale of two vaccines

Patients and the public need transparent information about vaccine safety and effectiveness--just as they do for any other pharmaceutical intervention. The safety profile and effectiveness of vaccines varies, as does the public health need for herd immunity. Some disease are highly contagious and deadly--here public safety concerns that are geared toward population safety are heightened. For other diseases, the risk of contagion or death is not as high. The effectiveness and the safety of vaccines varies. We need to be able to assess each vaccine individually without resorting to ad hominem attacks. The last Lyme vaccine had transparency issues similar to those described in the article. It was not very effective (3 shots over time to reach 80% effectiveness) and it was not very safe (a case action law suit was brought to require disclosure of safety issues). Another Lyme vaccine introduced at the same time was not taken to market due to safety issues. LymeRix, which was taken to market, was ultimately withdrawn amid poor sales, not surprisingly. Many errors were made when the vaccine was introduced and marketed that could have been avoided. The most critical one was the lack of transparency--that has left the Lyme community with distrust of more recent efforts. It would be incorrect to characterize the Lyme community as anti-vaxxers. The community simply wants any vaccine introduced to be both safe and effective and for manufacturers and the government to be transparent with the public,