Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dzt6s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T04:50:45.837Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Introduction: Vaccine Technologies and Public Health: Why a Critical Review Now?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 October 2009

Phyllis Freeman  and
Anthony Robbins
Phyllis Freeman
Affiliation:
University of Massachusetts Law Center
Anthony Robbins
Affiliation:
Boston University School of Public Health
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Since Jenner's time, there have always been enthusiasts and skeptics about the role of vaccines in the prevention of disease. This introduction explains why, at this time, it is crucial to assess the historical role vaccines have played in limiting damage caused by infectious diseases, the role they can play in the future, and the technologies that are best suited to achieving optimal gains for public health and development worldwide.

Type
Special Section: Vaccines and Public Health: Assessing Technologies and Public Policies
Information
International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care , Volume 10 , Issue 1 , Winter 1994 , pp. 1 - 6
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1994

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

1.Grant, J. P.State of the world's children. New York: Oxford University Press (for UNICEF), 1992, 14.Google Scholar
2.Institute of Medicine. New vaccine development: Establishing priorities, vol. 1. Diseases of importance in the United States, vol. 1. Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 1985; Diseases of importance in developing countries. vol. 2. Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 1986.Google Scholar
3.National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. The Jordan report: Progress in the accelerated development of new vaccines. Rockville, MD: NIAID, 1992.Google Scholar