Oral Faropenem Sodium – Implications for Antimicrobial Resistance and Treatment Effectiveness

Rising antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is causing therapeutic failures with antibiotics. Inappropriate use is a contributing factor. One such antibiotic on the radar is faropenem, a broad spectrum antibiotic approved in 2005 in India. Recently, faropenem sodium suspension was approved for use in children. There is a potential danger of overuse due to the convenience of oral administration. Other carbapenems such as meropenem are used parenterally. Overuse of faropenem may promote cross-resistance with other carbapenems making them ineffective.

The moral dilemma of the polio eradication programme

During the last five years, globally, cases of polio caused by vaccine viruses have outnumbered those of polio caused by natural (wild) polioviruses, posing a moral dilemma. Public health ethics should ensure the best interests of the community, with equity in sharing benefits and risks irrespective of socioeconomic disparities. Vaccine viruses in oral polio vaccine (OPV) cause vaccine-associated paralytic polio (VAPP), while paralytic polio is also caused by vaccine-derived polioviruses (VDPVs). By its policy of the use of OPV in low and middle-income countries, while rich countries use the safe inactivated polio vaccine (IPV), the Global Polio Eradication Programme has been responsible for social injustice. In 2017 and 2018, there were outbreaks of polio in Syria and Papua New Guinea due to circulating VDPVs, after many years of these countries remaining free of polio due to wild polioviruses. The only ethical way forward for global polio eradication is to replace OPV with IPV in all countries.

An ethical appraisal of the choice of vaccines against Poliomyelitis

Medical ethics is invoked for immunisation of children as it involves an interaction between a healthcare professional and the child. Immunisation under the national immunisation programme is a public health intervention and the common belief is that ethics is not relevant. Two vaccines with contrasting safety and efficacy profiles were available against polio before the national immunisation programme was launched: the inactivated poliovirus vaccine (IPV) and the live attenuated oral poliovirus vaccine (OPV). India chose OPV and excluded IPV. We carried out an ethical appraisal of that choice. Principles of medical ethics comprising four elements—non-maleficence, beneficence, autonomy and justice—was already in vogue at the time. Applying each of them, a head-to-head comparison between IPV and OPV is made. The results clearly show that the choice of vaccine was made without using ethical principles, resulting in serious adverse effects in hundreds of thousands of children. We recommend that medical ethics must be applied to all choices of public health interventions