Question

how does or will covid 19 vaccines be a positive and negative solution in a bio ethical stand point of patients autonomy.

Answer 1

In December 2019, an acute febrile illness accompanied by severe respiratory distress syndrome was identified in Wuhan, Hubei province, China. The first cases were linked to the Hunana Seafood Market, a wet market, although unrelated cases began to emerge shortly after, and then the disease spread rapidly from Wuhan to all of China, with cases reported in many other countries with local transmission. On January 30, 2020, the disease was declared by the World Health Organization (WHO) as a public health emergency of international concern and on March 11 it was declared a pandemic.

Developing a safe and effective vaccine takes time. There are currently more than 200 vaccine candidates under development, with many in clinical trials. A number of these vaccine candidates are in Phase III clinical trials – the final step before a vaccine is approved. Given the accelerated timelines global stakeholders are working toward, we expect some vaccines to have completed clinical trials and be approved for use in 2021.

Each country has regulatory bodies that oversee vaccine safety and efficacy before they are used widely. Globally, the WHO coordinates a number of independent technical bodies that review the safety of vaccines prior to and even after they have been introduced. Vaccines that are approved for use by the WHO have gone through rigorous tests and clinical trials to show that they are safe and effective in controlling diseases. Even though COVID-19 vaccines are being developed as rapidly as possible, they can only receive the required regulatory approvals if they meet stringent safety and efficacy standards.

UNICEF makes the safety of children and their families its highest priority – that includes the delivery of a vaccine that is safe.

Ethical considerations are vital to decision-making about the deployment of vaccines in acute humanitarian emergencies. Commitment to human rights and the rule of rescue place an onus on wealthy countries to ensure that life-saving vaccines are made available to the poorer countries during crises. Justice and ethics obligate those who are better off to assist those who are worse off and to allocate resources accordingly. National health authorities are morally obligated to do all that they reasonably can to implement evidence-based guidelines to avert preventable harm.

Positive Solution:

Number of lives saved and cases of disease averted by earlier availability of a (safer or more effective) vaccine Earlier return to normal global social functioning and associated economic and public health benefits

Immunity induced by experimental vaccines (if effective)

Immunity from experimental infection

Indirect benefits of participants becoming immune

Nagative solution:

Erosion of trust in challenge studies, research in general, or vaccines because of perceptions of challenge studies in this context or harms that arise for participants or third parties

Risks of experimental infection, including serious illness and death Risks related to experimental vaccines (including the potential for vaccine-enhanced disease)

Risk of infection of research staff Risk of transmission of infection to third parties in the community

Risks of inpatient isolation (e.g. mental health)