Lifestyle Vaccines and Public Health: Exploring Policy Options for a Vaccine to Stop Smoking

Experimental vaccines are being developed for the treatment of 'unhealthy lifestyles' and associated chronic illnesses. Policymakers and other stakeholders will have to deal with the ethical issues that this innovation path raises: are there morally justified reasons to integrate these innovative biotechnologies in future health policies? Should public money be invested in further research? Focusing on the case of an experimental nicotine vaccine, this article explores the ethical aspects of 'lifestyle vaccines' for public health. Based on findings from a qualitative study into a vaccine for smoking cessation, the article articulates possible value conflicts related to nicotine vaccination as an intervention in tobacco control. The 'vaccinization' of lifestyle disease piggybacks on the achievements of classic vaccines. Contrary to expectations of simplicity and success, quitting smoking with a vaccine requires a complex supportive network. Social justice and public trust may become important ethical challenges when deciding whether to use further public funds for research or whether to implement these innovative vaccines in the future.

Vaccination against smoking: an annotated agenda for debate. A review of scientific journals, 2001-13

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The ongoing development of novel nicotine vaccines makes it urgent to identify the normative questions around this innovative health technology against smoking.

METHODS

A qualitative thematic analysis of peer-reviewed papers on nicotine vaccination published between 2001 and 2013.

RESULTS

In the scientific discourse, nicotine vaccination is presented in a neurobiological frame as a potent concept for (long-term) smoking cessation. Nicotine vaccination is also considered a hypothetical strategy to prevent nicotine addiction in minors. Ethical assessments are conducted for the use of nicotine vaccination in public health and clinical medicine. Whereas vaccination for primary prevention is usually associated with public health, the hypothetical case of nicotine prevention in minors is also assessed for individualized protection. Therapeutic and preventive applications are given uneven attention: the classic goal of vaccination (primary prevention in minors) receives methodical consideration and invokes lively debate. The unprecedented use of vaccination, namely smoking cessation, is left largely unattended in the ethical analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

While health innovations such as nicotine vaccination need broad reflection to guide decisions on their further development and possible future implementations, only a small part of the ethical and social issues of this innovative technology has been discussed. For a debate to come into existence, a 'neurobio-psycho-socio-cultural' frame of smoking and quitting appears fruitful. Important topics for reflection are the human activities and social processes in a vaccine-supported quit attempt, next to respect for individuals, possible harms and questions of (global) justice and research ethics.

Enhancing Children against Unhealthy Behaviors-An Ethical and Policy Assessment of Using a Nicotine Vaccine

Health behaviors such as tobacco use contribute significantly to poor health. It is widely recognized that efforts to prevent poor health outcomes should begin in early childhood. Biomedical enhancements, such as a nicotine vaccine, are now emerging and have potential to be used for primary prevention of common diseases. In anticipation of such enhancements, it is important that we begin to consider the ethical and policy appropriateness of their use with children. The main ethical concerns raised by enhancing children relate to their impact on children's well-being and autonomy. These concerns are significant, however they do not appear to apply in the case of the nicotine vaccine; indeed the vaccine could even further these goals for children. Nevertheless, concerns about broadly applying this enhancement may be more challenging. The vaccine may be less cost-effective than alternative public efforts to prevent tobacco use, utilizing it could distract from addressing the foundational causes of smoking and it might not be publically acceptable. Empirical research about these concerns is needed to ascertain their likelihood and impact as well as how they could be minimized. This research could help determine whether behavior-related enhancements hold promise for improving children's health.