The committee has a variety of sources of information and technical expertise, beginning with its official and ex officio membership and including invited ad hoc experts from both inside and outside South Africa. It makes use of experts from the NICD and from university departments as well. Expertise is provided by WHO and UNICEF members participating in NAGI and is also obtained from WHO position statements. Industry representatives are either invited by NAGI or approach the committee requesting to be heard on specific issues. When deciding on recommendations, the committee

takes the following vaccine-preventable health outcomes into account, listed in descending order of importance: buy Lapatinib mortality, disability-adjusted life years or quality-adjusted life years lost, hospitalizations, equity, overall morbidity and epidemic potential. The committee assesses these factors as an ensemble, based on an overall portfolio of data. Recommendations are decided upon by consensus of NAGI members, excluding ex officio participants and have always been done so. There have never been instances

this website where voting was required or to record dissenting opinions, although provision has been made for doing so if the need arises. A report is then sent to the relevant officials in the DoH. Minutes of meetings record the deliberations and highlight specific recommendations. These minutes and recommendations are sent to the Director General of Health

for executive Libraries action. As NAGI reports directly and exclusively to the National DoH, the deliberations and specific formal recommendations are not published but are kept confidential. Discussions between the DoH and NAGI could, however, result in making information available to the public when there is a need, depending on the sensitivity of the matter under consideration. This situation has not occurred up until now. The committee generally follows WHO recommendations in its see more decision making, but there have been exceptions to this. For example, WHO recommends that the measles vaccine be given only at nine months [4], whereas South Africa provides vaccination at both nine and eighteen months. Likewise, the country has shifted to providing IPV at six, ten, and fourteen weeks, with OPV given at birth and at six weeks, all of which is not consistent with WHO policy [5]. Additionally, the PCV immunization schedules of six and fourteen weeks and then again at nine months (as opposed to WHO policy of 6-10-14 weeks or 2-4-6 months [6]), as well as the rotavirus scheduled dose at fourteen weeks (as opposed to WHO policy of six and ten weeks [7]), indicate an occasional independence from WHO directives.