European Vaccination Week is coming to an end. The World Health Organization chose as its motto for this year, ‘Vaccines work for all generations’, referring immediately to vaccination in adulthood. Is it an option for the future?
Undoubtedly. We must take into account that there is a set of diseases for which there are already vaccines, administered to children at a very early age, because it is at this stage that there is greater willingness and vulnerability – in fact, if today we hear about some diseases without having had direct contact with them, as is the case with measles, it is thanks to effective vaccines -, but obviously there are other diseases or infectious agents in which the most vulnerable groups are adults, including the elderly. I am referring, for example, to respiratory diseases, flu and Covid-19, pneumonia and even Shingles – a disease that appears due to the reactivation of the chickenpox virus, which many people contracted as children. In other words, the virus remains latent and can reappear in adulthood, which is extremely impactful. Therefore, it is necessary to bear in mind that when we talk about vaccines it is true that most of those that exist are for children and newborns, but it is equally true that there are diseases in which the population most at risk are adults or the elderly, who must be vaccinated to protect themselves against the most serious consequences of these diseases.
But what are these diseases and what are the advantages of vaccination?
I would say that respiratory diseases, such as the flu, Covid-19, pneumonia, are those to which adults and the elderly are most vulnerable and for which there are recommended vaccines. Then we have tetanus, which is a vaccine that must be reinforced throughout life, even in adulthood. And there are also hepatitis A and B vaccines, which are absolutely suitable for those who were not vaccinated at an earlier age. But we also have vaccines for more exotic diseases to which adults may be more vulnerable if they travel to certain areas of the world, which are those recommended in traveler consultations, such as yellow fever, which is a typical example of those that can be administered at any age depending on travel. The essential thing is that there is always medical monitoring and the recommendation to take the available vaccines in a way that is appropriate for that person.
In the Assembly of the Republic there is a resolution calling for the review of the National Vaccination Plan (PNV). As an expert, do you agree that some of these vaccines for adults are part of this plan?
The decision about which vaccines are part of the PNV takes several factors into account. First of all, and obviously, the availability of vaccines and the cost-benefit of vaccination. As a researcher, and as a citizen, I consider it important that systematic evaluations are carried out on the vaccines that are part of the PNV and on others that may be included, because research evolves and new vaccines emerge. It’s a matter of being up to date with what threats are, but also with what the tools are to combat them. Therefore, I am completely in favor of there being a recurring and regular evaluation so that, depending on clinical criteria, the PNV list is updated. I also understand that it is something that must be debated and evaluated politically, because there are costs associated with the introduction of a vaccine in the PNV, but the criteria that must govern the updating of the list of vaccines in the PNV must be, above all, clinical.
Portugal is considered an example in vaccination adherence. This was the case during the Covid-19 pandemic, but what still needs to be done about vaccination in our country? Are there still obstacles to overcome?
Portugal is one of the countries with the highest vaccination coverage rates in Europe. And this is due to the fact that the PNV is well defined and also to the fact that our medical community does important work in recommending vaccination. But there is always a need to demonstrate and educate people about the importance of vaccinating themselves and their children. Now, if you ask me what the biggest threat is for us to stop being an example, I would tend to say that it is disinformation. The biggest threat to vaccination and disease prevention in this way is, without a doubt, misinformation and conspiracy theories without any scientific or medical support. This creates some anxiety and instills in people inadequate notions about vaccination that may affect their willingness to vaccinate themselves and their children. In my opinion, this is the great risk we run in the future in terms of having lower percentages of the vaccinated population.
Are you talking about misinformation spread by anti-vaccine movements?
We all know that there are anti-vaccine movements. We all know that, at the moment, there is an administration in the USA – which is the country where there is a Center for Disease Control that is a global reference for good health practices, including vaccination, which has a Secretary of State in the area of Health without adequate scientific information to make decisions on certain issues, but that this does not prevent him from doing so. Now, this is obviously a risk, so that people start to have hesitations or distrust. One thing is legitimate doubts, questions that people may have and which must be answered with the attention they deserve, another is pure misinformation, which arises from people who have distorted views of reality and who are not convinced by facts, preferring their illusions and their own truth, which is not that of the facts. It is necessary to prevent and combat this misinformation to reduce the risk of people starting to have a different attitude towards vaccination than they have had until now, which is appropriate.
Is this misinformation a real threat in Portugal?
It is a real threat throughout the world, because at the moment they have privileged vehicles to reach people, through social networks or other available forms of communication. People receive messages on their cell phones and computers whose origin they do not know and which can lead to behaviors that put their lives and health at risk. We must always carry out an exercise in verifying the origin of the information we receive, we must not forward messages we receive without any scrutiny. Ideally we should seek independent information on this topic, coming from people who have knowledge on the subject. It’s as simple as this: if I want to build a bridge that I have to walk across every day, I’m not going to ask some curious person on the internet to plan it. In the same way, if I need reliable information on health issues, I should not ask for information from so-called curious people on the internet, but from doctors, researchers, scientists and responsible and reputable entities who can provide that information. These are the ones you should turn to to ask any questions you have and get answers.
