Analysis
A Palestinian doctor criticized the use of oral polio vaccines in Gaza, suggesting that they will do more harm to the malnourished and extremely vulnerable population. The post describes OPV as a vaccine rejected by other nations that carries a high risk of vaccine-associated polio. Although the wording is unclear, the post falsely suggests that cVDPV is a risk to vaccinated children. Most responses to the post were generally in agreement and supportive of the message. Two users noted that the vaccine used in Gaza is the novel OPV2, while the doctor appears to be referring to other OPVs.
Recommendations
The sensitive nature of the topic, the fact that the source is a health communicator, and the potential to cause vaccine hesitancy during an ongoing outbreak increase the risk. Some people argue that the rare occurrence of vaccine-derived polio is a reason not to accept OPV. But this argument ignores that OPV is the only way to prevent polio spread and protect children during an active outbreak. Communicators are encouraged to respond with empathy and understanding to concerns about OPV safety.
Talking points may explain that OPV is used in countries around the world because it is safe, provides lifelong protection, and is the only vaccine that can prevent poliovirus spread. The vaccine has protected billions of children and multiple generations. Trusted communicators may also emphasize that cVDPV is very rare and does not pose a risk to vaccinated children. Messaging may also explain that nOPV2, the vaccine administered in Gaza, carries a significantly low risk of cVDPV2.