Would you be for mandating, in high-income countries, the administration of a vaccine against rotaviruses knowing their efficiency is only 45%? Rotavirus is evaluated at 1% of children deaths in these countries [1] (from CDC, a source you mention yourself). Will you also push for a vaccine for the 99 other percent?
Where to start with this?
45% is a pretty low effectiveness rate. I'd prefer to see it higher, but nevertheless 45% success should improve herd immunity, right?
Rotavirus is evaluated at 1% of children deaths in these countries
If that is correct, then that is a HUGE death rate. Anything to reduce that seems sensible.
Will you also push for a vaccine for the 99 other percent?
Well.. can you predict in advance which are the 1% who are going to die? If you can then vaccinate them! If not then it would seem sensible to vaccinate everyone to develop her immunity. That will (a) directly decrease the death rate by making some who would have died immune, and (b) indirectly decrease the death rate by making it less likely to be transmitted.
Edit: Reading a bit, I believe your numbers are incorrect - or at least the way you have phrased it. 1% may be the rate in developing countries, but it isn't in developed countries.
The Wikipedia article on Rotavirus[1] makes the vaccine seem pretty compelling: In Mexico, which in 2006 was among the first countries in the world to introduce rotavirus vaccine, diarrhoeal disease death rates dropped during the 2009 rotavirus season by more than 65 percent among children age two and under.....In the United States, rotavirus vaccination since 2006 has led to drops in rotavirus-related hospitalizations by as much as 86 percent. The vaccines may also have prevented illness in non-vaccinated children by limiting the number of circulating infections.
So yes, in my opinion - based on 10 minutes of research only - it should be mandatory.
Just to be sure we agree: it is 1% of deaths, not of children. Maybe the efforts should focus on bigger death causes of children. My opinion of course.
Your example talks about mexico, which is not a high income country, and the US, which has amongst the worst life expectancy amongst developed countries....
Where to start with this?
45% is a pretty low effectiveness rate. I'd prefer to see it higher, but nevertheless 45% success should improve herd immunity, right?
Rotavirus is evaluated at 1% of children deaths in these countries
If that is correct, then that is a HUGE death rate. Anything to reduce that seems sensible.
Will you also push for a vaccine for the 99 other percent?
Well.. can you predict in advance which are the 1% who are going to die? If you can then vaccinate them! If not then it would seem sensible to vaccinate everyone to develop her immunity. That will (a) directly decrease the death rate by making some who would have died immune, and (b) indirectly decrease the death rate by making it less likely to be transmitted.
Edit: Reading a bit, I believe your numbers are incorrect - or at least the way you have phrased it. 1% may be the rate in developing countries, but it isn't in developed countries.
The Wikipedia article on Rotavirus[1] makes the vaccine seem pretty compelling: In Mexico, which in 2006 was among the first countries in the world to introduce rotavirus vaccine, diarrhoeal disease death rates dropped during the 2009 rotavirus season by more than 65 percent among children age two and under.....In the United States, rotavirus vaccination since 2006 has led to drops in rotavirus-related hospitalizations by as much as 86 percent. The vaccines may also have prevented illness in non-vaccinated children by limiting the number of circulating infections.
So yes, in my opinion - based on 10 minutes of research only - it should be mandatory.
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotavirus#Prevention