Dr. Benchimol is supported by a Career Development Award from the Canadian Child Health Clinician Scientist Program, a Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) strategic training program. Dr. Little is supported by the Canada Research Chair program. Dr. Wilson is supported by the

Chair in Public Health Policy at The Ottawa Hospital, the University of Ottawa’s Department of Medicine and the Ottawa Hospital Research Institute. None of the authors received an honorarium, grant, or other form of payment to produce the manuscript. Kumanan Wilson reports developing a smartphone immunization app for the Canadian Public Health Association to help people get accurate information on vaccines and track their vaccinations. The authors have no other conflicts of interest to disclose. The opinions, results, and conclusions reported in this paper are Selleckchem Navitoclax Buparlisib in vitro those of the authors and are independent of any funding sources. “
“It has been over a decade since scholars began to articulate principles to guide the ethical analysis

of issues in public health. Public health ethics is now a robust field of study including theoretical and practical considerations. However, there is a paucity of ethical analysis about the issues associated with pharmaceutical and vaccine regulation, particularly in the post-licensure context [1] and [2]. Risk-benefit analysis and policy-making are not a value-free enterprises, and involve important moral trade-offs. Often these ethical trade-offs are not explicitly articulated, and remain invisible. In this paper, we focus on the post-market monitoring of vaccines and identify ethical considerations arising from their monitoring and regulation. Many of the ethical considerations raised here will be relevant

to the post-market monitoring of drugs as well, but not necessarily to the pre-authorization phase of regulation and research because of the distinguishing conditions of uncertainty and, at times, urgency [1] that obtain in the real-world setting of vaccine use. Rutecarpine In the last decade there has been a growing acknowledgement internationally that government bodies responsible for ensuring the safety and effectiveness of pharmaceuticals and vaccines face serious challenges when protecting the public from harm once these products are used by people in the uncontrolled, real-world context [4], [5], [6] and [7]. In most jurisdictions, regulation has been moving towards an approach that takes into account the full lifecycle of a drug or vaccine. This shift to lifecycle regulation has brought with it a more comprehensive surveillance mandate and sometimes progressive licensing legislation as well as the need for more evidence-generating capacity about how drugs and vaccines behave outside of clinical trials.