# Insights from Vaccine Experts on Their Decision-Making Process
Written on
Understanding Vaccine Decisions
As we approach the end of the year, key results from major COVID-19 vaccine trials are expected to emerge, potentially as early as this month. These findings will help determine if the vaccines effectively prevent the virus. The crucial phase-three trials involve extensive volunteer participation to evaluate the vaccines against a placebo.
In conversations with six prominent experts in virology and vaccines, Business Insider explored their criteria for deciding on vaccination. The opinions vary significantly among these specialists.
Some experts expressed willingness to receive the vaccine if U.S. health authorities deemed it safe and effective for their demographic. Although they hope for a highly effective vaccine, some are prepared to accept lower efficacy, similar to that of seasonal flu vaccines, which can hover around 50% effectiveness.
Others seek more tailored data that reflects their demographic and emphasizes long-term safety and effectiveness.
How Experts Plan to Make Their Decisions
Virologist Richard Condit: Trust in Trial Conductors
Richard Condit, a seasoned virologist, indicated he would rely on the integrity of the trial administrators. He stated, “If they indicate we have enough data to declare a certain level of efficacy without significant adverse effects, I’m likely to proceed.” Although he expressed some concern about political influence on vaccine approvals, he maintains trust in the scientists at the CDC and FDA.
“I understand the risks involved given my age,” he noted. “However, the likelihood of benefits outweighing potential negative outcomes from the disease is significant.”
Pediatric Vaccine Researcher Dr. Robert Frenck: Immediate Vaccination Preference
Dr. Robert Frenck, the director of Cincinnati Children’s Hospital’s Vaccine Research Center, is currently involved in Pfizer's final clinical trial. He expressed eagerness to receive the vaccine, stating, “Once it becomes available, I want it immediately.” With decades of experience, Frenck believes large-scale trials will provide a reliable safety profile.
“The worst-case scenario is an immune response that’s suboptimal, but I’m willing to accept that risk,” he added.
Microbiologist Deborah Fuller: Vaccine as a Societal Asset
Deborah Fuller, from the University of Washington, approaches vaccination from a communal perspective. She believes that while individual benefits are important, the broader societal impact of herd immunity is crucial. “I would be fine with a vaccine that is only 50% effective,” she stated, recognizing that even modest effectiveness can significantly reduce disease severity.
Vaccine Inventor Dr. Paul Offit: Representation Matters
Dr. Paul Offit, a prominent vaccine educator, underscored the importance of ensuring adequate representation in clinical studies for people over 65. “I need to know how effective the vaccine is for my age group,” he remarked, hoping for at least a 70% reduction in severe disease risk.
Dr. Jesse Goodman: Data-Driven Decision-Making
Dr. Jesse Goodman, former chief scientist at the FDA, emphasized the necessity of reviewing detailed trial data before making a vaccination decision. “If the evidence shows clear effectiveness without concerning safety signals, I would likely proceed,” he explained.
Biotech Executive William Haseltine: Cautious Approach
William Haseltine, a seasoned biotech leader, expressed a more cautious viewpoint, prioritizing long-term safety data before considering vaccination. “My family and I will wait a couple of years,” he stated, highlighting concerns about potential long-term effects that are yet to be fully understood.
In summary, as vaccine results are anticipated, experts are carefully weighing their options based on data, societal impact, and personal risk factors. Their insights illustrate the diverse perspectives within the scientific community regarding the COVID-19 vaccination process.
For additional insights, please refer to the following video: