Monopolization of Vaccination is one of the extremely few cases where it's almost inevitable. I would like to echo the claims made in this discussion—vaccination is not a matter of improvement for better quality and competition, but rather a matter of change and modification when viruses adapt to current surroundings and allow mutated, stronger strains to grow and reproduce. What becomes unequivocal then, is that massive companies that produce vaccines must not cut through any of the ethical lines. Understanding its monopolization, companies must make vaccines affordable to all groups of people that need it, and must have their effects proven and publicized to vaxxers. An incident like the one that Jay said above is an example of a monopolized vaccination company that dismissed all ethical boundaries. Profit should be the last of the last concern or even priority, as vaccination is ultimately for a humanitarian cause.

I think that's definitely the derived question—who is "bound" to vaccinate his/herself or his/her children and who is "qualified" enough to not go through vaccination? After all, according to numerous comments within this post, it's clear that a "herd" or a "group" of individuals that are vaccinated can prevent the contagiousness of a virus/bacteria, even if there are a meager few who decide not to. This ultimately leads to a question ethics too, because that means some people NEED to vaccinate themselves/their children even though they necessarily don't have to (if there's at least >95% of people who are vaccinated) merely due to their financial status while others simply benefit from this situation. This is no different than commensalism. It sounds a little outlandish to me because there would be absolutely no way that all severely-low income families get away from pricey vaccinations; some families are required to be vaccinated even if they're financially capable because there's going to be at least one family that decides not to. It would be interesting to see what the government comes up with if there ever happens to be an argument of "vaccination burden."

In Korea, an organization called the Korea Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (KACIP) exists, in which they make recommendations regarding vaccination practices to the National Immunization Program. This committee help create new laws or regulate current laws based on the public's opinions of current vaccination practices and its enforcement. In reference to Ariel's comment on vaccination specific to each country, it is clear that vaccination is required in Korea when it comes to certain diseases.

I totally agree. I think that it's almost an obligation for parents to provide vaccination for their children because vaccinating is no different than taking necessary safety and health precautions. But by the same token, it's ironic to see that while most parents (at least in Korea) make sure their children are vaccinated, they completely overlook other actions that could pose severe risks to their children's health, such as sleep deprivation and excessive junk food consumption. Most of them might think that it's justified to let their children consume energy drinks and sleep extremely late for the sake of academic achievements, but that in itself is no different than not vaccinating their children—these courses of action could definitely lead to a severe imbalance in lifestyle. I think part of this stems from the fact that they associate inadequate vaccination to more severe health problems compared to lifestyle issues. However, not a lot of parents know about the actual diseases and illnesses that sprout from unhealthy behaviors; stress, after all, is the leading cause of early death and many other diseases. I think the detriments of neglected lifestyles and inadequate vaccination should be publicized equally.

Although it's pretty evident that vaccinations serve numerous benefits to societies' collective health, I think that there are several notable limitations to address. First of all, financing for immunization practices remains a significant challenge. According to the 2007 study done by the World Health Organization, a severe funding gap of approximately 13 billion USD is expected to remain if around 10 million more lives are to be saved through this practice. Second of all, concerns regarding the financial sustainability of future vaccination efforts in developing countries remain, as financial responsibility between national organizations will be necessary. Finally, a study titled "The complexity and cost of vaccine manufacturing—An overview" shows that for lower and middle income countries to acquire adequate immunization practices, a significant amount of medical equipment, personnel, and consumables will need to be imported for numerous years. All of this goes to show the economic challenges that persist within the spread of vaccination programs and initiatives.