Further investigations are ongoing in this area. It is worth mentioning that not only chance of reinfection but also severity of diarrhea has been found to decrease

following first infection with rotavirus in north India and abroad [35] and [36]. The goal that has been pursued VRT752271 in vivo to develop live oral rotavirus vaccines [66] is to duplicate the degree of protection against the disease (effect) that follows natural infection [67]. Corroboration regarding reduction in severity of rotavirus gastroenteritis following vaccination has been obtained through clinical trials from Bangladesh and Vietnam [11]. Further supportive evidence come from Mexico and Brazil [68] and [69], which have witnessed reduction in childhood mortality and hospitalizations due to diarrheal disease – mostly noted among children under two years age – following introduction of rotavirus vaccine. As a proactive policy making process needs to draw evidences from multiple sources, most of the above evidence favors introducing rotavirus vaccine. Macro-social environmental issues constitute another area of discussion. Infrastructural

development is favored over rotavirus vaccine by some as, presumably, such interventions would reduce diarrheal morbidity and mortality, including those caused by rotavirus. We maintain that policy making often takes place in an environment of incomplete empirical evidence. For instance, evidence on effectiveness of improved sanitation, hygiene and provision of safe water in controlling rotavirus diarrhea [12] and [38] may not be see more available in the immediate future. We emphasize, ‘introduction of rotavirus vaccine in national immunization program in India’ and ‘infrastructural development ensuring sanitation, hygiene

and safe water’ should not be pitched against each other as these agenda are not mutually exclusive. While the former is necessary to Non-specific serine/threonine protein kinase fulfill the immediate goal of reducing rotavirus induced morbidity and mortality in children under-five, the other will pay dividends in the long-run. As indicated by Anderson et al. [70], it is unrealistic to demand that every decision be based on robust scientific evidence, especially when we know that we are far from having all the information we need. Many live oral vaccines often elicit reduced immunogenicity when administered in a developing nation, compared to industrialized country settings [71]. This has also been the case with rotavirus vaccines [72] and [73]. Reasons for this reduced immune response is yet to be clearly understood, although tropical enteropathy, characterized by intestinal inflammation, blunting of small intestinal villi, and mal-absorption, along with poor nutrition have been hypothesized as potential causes [74]. While reduced efficacy due to the above reasons is a reality, work of Rheingans et al.