Contradicting the theory that vaccines are the only solution to preventing the spread of cervical cancer, a study published today in the American Journal of Preventive Medicine found that many people in the developing world are receiving inadequate or even nonexistent vaccines.
Researchers at the University of Washington analyzed data from the World Health Organization’s Global Burden of Disease Study (GBD-09) from 1998 to 2017.
They found that the global vaccination coverage of all women aged 15-44 was just 3.5 percent.
That was less than half the percentage in the United States, which has the world’s highest vaccination coverage.
And it was even less than the 5.5-percent in the poorest countries, including Nigeria, the Philippines, and Tanzania.
This finding has serious implications for the fight against cervical cancer in the future, said lead author Shailesh Shah, a doctoral student at the UW.
“Vaccine coverage has to be higher if we’re going to prevent cervical cancer.”
The study, conducted by Dr. Shah, Dr. William G. Taylor, and their colleagues at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, examined data from 1,200 women from 12 countries.
They also looked at the incidence of cervical cancers in the populations they sampled, comparing rates between countries and their national vaccination coverage rates.
The researchers analyzed the data by country, age group, and region to look at the vaccination coverage and rates of cervical cervical cancer.
They then compared these rates across the different countries, based on the World Bank’s Global Capability Index, or GCI.
The GCI, which measures the coverage and coverage ratio of vaccines in the countries studied, measures how much each country is expected to achieve by 2030.
The study found that India has a GCI of 1.2, followed by Pakistan with a GCII of 1,531, and Nigeria with a value of 1 to 5.
The US and the United Kingdom were the lowest, at 1.1 and 1.3, respectively.
The authors say this shows that India, Pakistan, and the US are all below average in their coverage of vaccines, despite the fact that they have the highest vaccination rates.
What’s more, they found that a small proportion of women in these countries were receiving inadequate vaccines, with the GCI in the US at 3.7 percent and in India at 4.5.
They note that the rate of undervaccination is higher in poorer countries.
In other words, the women who were receiving the vaccine that was most effective were getting the vaccine with the most coverage, but not the most effectiveness.
This is a significant finding because it contradicts the assumption that vaccines must be effective in the face of a vaccine shortage, said Dr. Taylor.
“When you look at vaccines that work in the lab, it is not always that you’re able to get it to the people you want to,” he said.
“This is what’s called a false positive rate.
There’s no way to know if a vaccine works when you only get the right dose or if you’re giving a different vaccine to the right people,” Taylor added.
“So it is important to know the vaccine effectiveness in the right doses, to know what is the best way to give a vaccine, to understand when a vaccine is most effective.”
“There are very few countries where the vaccines are actually delivered, and very few where they are delivered at all,” said Taylor.
The researchers hope to conduct a follow-up study in the coming years that will examine this further.
Dr. Taylor noted that this finding shows that the vaccines in place today can be used for the very same purposes.
“I can tell you that the vaccine is not going to work against the virus, because it can’t,” he added.
The reason vaccines are so effective is that the virus doesn’t exist in these vaccines, and thus they don’t have to be.
The authors acknowledge that the GCIs are based on estimates, and it is possible that there are some cases of under-vaccination that have not been identified.
They say they hope to be able to look into these cases and get an accurate estimate.
For more information on vaccines, including those made for use in the USA, see:Vaccines: What are they?
What are the benefits?
What can we do about them?
Sources: UW, Johns Hopkins, The Next World, Columbia University, The Guardian