Contesting claims on the safety and acceptability of anti-fertifity vaccines

Innovations in monoclonal antibody-based multipurpose prevention technology (MPT) for the prevention of sexually transmitted infections and unintended pregnancy

Monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) are currently being produced for a number of clinical applications including contraception and the prevention of sexually transmitted infections (STIs). Combinations of contraceptive and anti-STI mAbs, including antibodies against HIV-1 and HSV-2, provide a powerful and flexible approach for highly potent and specific multipurpose prevention technology (MPT) products with desirable efficacy, safety and pharmacokinetic profiles. MAbs can be administered systemically by injection, or mucosally via topical products (e.g., films, gels, rings) which can be tailored for vaginal, penile or rectal administration to address the needs of different populations. The MPT field has faced challenges with safety, efficacy, production and cost. Here, we review the state-of-the-art of mAb MPTs that tackle these challenges with innovative strategies in mAb engineering, manufacturing, and delivery that could usher in a new generation of safe, efficacious, cost-effective, and scalable mAb MPTs.

Contesting contraceptive innovation—Reinventing the script

The article describes how the merging of Southern and Northern women's health groups resulted in a powerful transnational movement, with a collective oppositional identity based on shared solidarity in campaigns for reproductive rights and against state coercion in reproductive matters. It focuses on the ways in which the movement framed issues of rights and safety and pointed to the possible abuse potential of two new longer-acting contraceptive technologies, Norplant and the anti-fertility vaccines. The contestations by women's health advocates resulted in the emergence of a strong commitment among scientists to involve women's health advocates in the development and introduction of new contraceptive technologies. By engaging in the construction of safety and efficacy claims, and by outlining conditions for the introduction of the new technologies (so-called introduction scripts) women's health advocates were able to reinscribe the technologies with representations of bodily integrity and reproductive rights, rather than population control. I argue that a split within the women's health movement on the need to ban the new technologies did not weaken its impact, but, in fact, enhanced this success. I describe, in detailed case studies on the Norplant and Anti-fertility vaccine controversies, how both strands of women's health advocacy claim to be able to represent the interest of users, but that their representations of users differ. The 'no-to-Norplant' and 'no-to-anti-fertility' vaccines strands see users as victims of a state-led medical establishment enabled power, which is inscribed in the technology. The more moderate strand of activism argue that women's interests and needs differ from one setting to another, and that they are best met by making available to women a range of contraceptive options which allow for a free and informed choice.