This article is within the scope of WikiProject Africa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Africa on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AfricaWikipedia:WikiProject AfricaTemplate:WikiProject AfricaAfrica articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Disaster management, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Disaster management on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Disaster managementWikipedia:WikiProject Disaster managementTemplate:WikiProject Disaster managementDisaster management articles
This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Death, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Death on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DeathWikipedia:WikiProject DeathTemplate:WikiProject DeathDeath articles
This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject 2010s, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of 2010s on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.2010sWikipedia:WikiProject 2010sTemplate:WikiProject 2010s2010s articles
The paragraph on oral vaccines seems unbalanced. The first source is primary research, and the second is behind a paywall. But from what I can tell, there are reasons for the current WHO policy of not rushing vaccines to an outbreak area, and the policy is just now changing. Kendall-K1 (talk) 12:48, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I am afraid that the article was unbalanced without mentioning oral cholera vaccines. The safe, oral vaccines have been around for over 20 years but are not much used in public health. How can you not consider this option in an outbreak? The fact the NYT and the journal Science, both leading in their respective fields, are taking the use of oral cholera vaccines in outbreak situations seriously indicates that this is not an outlandish idea but mainstream. The scandal is the witholding of the vaccine. I happy to expand further if you think this would be helpful. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lseidlein (talk • contribs) 23:54, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The problem is that the subject isn't covered well enough and what we have isn't well sourced. Do you have some good sources we can use? See WP:V for what makes a good source. Kendall-K1 (talk) 00:38, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I also just noticed that the statement about vaccines not being distributed is sourced by a paper from Jan 2011. Since that's well before the outbreak started, it can't possibly contain any information about the deployment of vaccines in the current outbreak. Kendall-K1 (talk) 15:04, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You are right that there is no evidence that oral vaccines will shorten outbreaks. I have therefore revised the language. Several groups are working on models trying to estimate how to optimise the use of oral cholera vaccines. An additional problem besides getting the vaccines will be to estimate the benefit? the best evidence would come from a randomised controlled trial. but how can you possibly randomise outbreaks - ethically, politically and logitically? And it would require a really large number of outbreaks because each outbreak is quite different from the previous one.--Lseidlein (talk) 23:23, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
