| If you're in the US, you're probably used to seeing seasonal headlines about who should get what vaccine. You know, guidance like that people over 60 should get an RSV shot or that some people need more Covid boosters. And you might have wondered: Says who? The answer is the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. But more specifically, that responsibility falls on a sort of public health all-star team tasked with kicking the tires on every new vaccine to determine whether it's worth the hassle — and the cost — of rolling out nationwide. It's called the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, or ACIP, and it's made up of 15 independent experts who gather in Atlanta three times a year for a rubber-meets-road debate about vaccines. The process starts at the US Food and Drug Administration, which approves new vaccines based on whether they've proved to be safe and effective. Then it's ACIP's job to take the conversation further. A new vaccine might work in a clinical trial, but can it be practically administered in, say, a rural pediatrician's office? And, with the CDC spending hundreds of millions of dollars a year to subsidize immunizations, can it do enough good to justify taxpayers shelling out for it? ACIP members hash all that out in their public meetings. Last week, for example, ACIP spent hours digging into a new Merck vaccine for a bacterial infection that causes pneumonia. Then they issue an opinion to the head of the CDC, who typically makes their findings an official recommendation. And then you get the headlines about Covid-19 boosters, flu shots, and RSV vaccines. "It's a very healthy part of the scientific process," says Katherine Poehling, a Wake Forest University pediatrician and former ACIP member. Applicants to the panel are screened for conflicts of interest, and every shred of data they discuss is uploaded to the CDC's website where anyone can find it, alongside the YouTube livestream of their meetings. "It's enabling people with diverse experience to be able to study the data, publicly discuss it, and make the recommendations that are in the best interest of all," says Poehling. It's not a responsibility ACIP members take lightly. Slots on the committee are highly competitive, and serving a four-year term on ACIP is a capstone for any career in public health, says Lynn Bahta, a nurse at the Minnesota Department of Health. Bahta's stint on the committee coincided with the emergence of Covid, when ACIP held multiple emergency meetings to steer the deployment of vaccines for a virus no one had heard of just months before. "That was probably my proudest moment," she says, "to be able to serve my country in that way." — Damian Garde | 
No comments:
Post a Comment