|
||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
The following HTML text is provided to enhance online readability. Many aspects of typography translate only awkwardly to HTML. Please use the page image as the authoritative form to ensure accuracy. and efficacy. Information relevant to assessing the efficacy of the vaccine is presented in Chapter 3. The establishment of efficacy is crucial before one can consider the use of any such intervention, and no safety risk is tolerable in the absence of efficacy. Chapter 4 introduces the types of information available concerning the assessment of vaccine safety, whereas Chapters 5 and 6 review the safety data available on this vaccine from case reports and from epidemiologic studies, respectively. Issues related to manufacturing are reviewed in Chapter 7, and in Chapter 8 the committee discusses needs for future efforts, including gaps in research. REFERENCESCDC (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention). 2000. Use of anthrax vaccine in the United States: recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP). MMWR (Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report) 49(RR-15):1–20. CDC. 2001. Update: investigation of bioterrorism-related inhalational anthrax—Connecticut, 2001. MMWR (Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report) 50(47):1049–1051. Henderson DA. 1999. The looming threat of bioterrorism. Science 283(5406):1279–1282. IOM (Institute of Medicine). 2000. Gulf War and Health. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press. IOM. 2001. CDC Anthrax Vaccine Safety & Efficacy Research Program. Interim Report. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press. Zilinskas RA. 1997. Iraq’s biological weapons: the past as future? JAMA 278(5):418–424.
|
|
|||||||||||||||
