Noninvasive vaccination as a casus belli to redeem vaccine value in the face of anti-vaccine movements

Abstract

Formidable anti-vaccine movements have been growing as a menace to disrupt beneficial vaccine programs. Although the vaccination-associated adverse effects commonly perceived by vaccine resisters usually represent over-reactions to rare manifestations, converging evidence shows that vaccination-associated health threats could be pervasive when systemic inflammation is considered as a side effect that oozes over time. An anti-vaccine movement thus may not be so unfounded even though the myriad cascades triggered by systemic inflammation have not been brought to a clear focus during any anti-vaccine campaign. Since both pro-and antivaccine groups are acting on the same primal impulse -"keep people healthy," reconciliation between the two warring factions should be achievable on a palatable trend that fosters the development of noninvasive vaccines which tend to induce local and transient inflammation along the interface with diminished potential to percolate through internal organs. Anti-vaccine movements fueled by vaccines' incertitudeVaccination is widely heralded as a medical paradigm credited with mitigation of many vaccination-preventable diseases through massimmunization programs. However, its success has also precipitated an active opposition. The genesis of the anti-vaccine movement surge could be traced back to the anti-vaccine sentiment catalyzed by the Britain's Compulsory Vaccination Act of 1853, which mandated the vaccination of all infants [1]. The controversial pertussis and hepatitis B virus (HBV) vaccines in conjunction with the apocryphal link between vaccination and autism not only re-catalyzed a groundswell of antivaccine activism but catapulted it into a phase of erudite opposition [2].Anti-vaccine groups are formed mostly by affluent "knowledge seekers" who claim the right to make "informed choices" about vaccination [2][3][4]. Today's vaccines largely represent a double-edged sword to vaccine resisters even though they are agnostic about what causes vaccines' side effects. Regardless of their creeds, the incipient anti-vaccine movements have been implicated in low vaccine coverages in conjunction with hazardous outbreaks of preventable diseases [5].The grand success of vaccination programs is undeniable, and no anti-vaccine groups in the modern era have advocated a divorce by forbidding vaccines altogether in the medical arsenal. The schism between vaccine supporters and resisters can be attributed to the scope of restricted use of vaccines. Vaccine supporters' zeitgeist is based on the belief that vaccines' risks are minuscule with their core health benefits in vanquishing diseases far eclipse their risks, whereas vaccine resisters fear the brunt of vaccination due to vaccines' incertitude and their arcane mechanisms of action. Overall, the bifurcated stances are not as mutually exclusive from an ethical perspective.Vaccine supporters often impugn vaccine resisters for avoiding vaccination against communicable diseases on the premise that individuals opting out of immunization may j...