Types of Vaccines : APPSC G1 mains -Paper 4 - Section 2 Unit 5

Types of Vaccines

 There are several types of vaccines that are designed to trigger the body to produces an immune response. Vaccines are made differently depending on the characteristics of the disease infecting agent, whether it is a bacteria, virus or toxin.  There are two main types of vaccines 1) Live, attenuated vaccines and 2) inactivated vaccines.

Live attenuated vaccines

Live attenuated vacines are made up of living virus or bacteria that have been modified through a process to weaken (attenuate) and reduce it's virulence (disease inducing ability). These wild viruses or bacteria are attenuated in a laboratory, usually by repeated culturing. For example, the measles vaccine used today was isolated from a child with measles disease in 1954. Almost 10 years of serial passage on tissue culture media was required to transform the wild virus into vaccine virus . A live attenuated vaccine creates a good immune response (cellular and antibody) and often provides lifelong immunity with only one or two doses. Certain vaccines against viral diseases are made this way, eg  measles, mumps, and chickenpox. Because these vaccines are live, they are contraindicated for people with impaired immunity; for example people suffering from leukaemia or HIV infection.

Inactivated vaccines

Inactivated vaccines do not contain live virus or bacteria. The diseases microbes have been killed by chemicals, heat or radiation. They cannot replicate and cause disease. Inactivated vaccines stimulate a weaker immune response than live vaccines and always require several doses to provide a pretective immmune response. Immunity can also diminish over time and a booster shot is required to maintain immunity.  Inactivated vaccines can be composed of either whole viruses or bacteria, or fractions of either

Subunit vaccines

These vaccines don't use the entire microbe, but instead are made from only part of the microbe. Scientist use the 'part' that best stimulates the immune system. Because these vaccines only use a part and not all the other molecules that make up the microbe, the chances of adverse reactions to the vaccine are lower.

Conjugate

These vaccines are very important especially in young infants. Some bacteria that can cause disease have a special outer coating (sugar molecules called polysaccharides) that hides them from the immune system (especially immature immune system of infants).Conjugate vaccines link these coatings to an antigen or toxiod that an immature immune system can recognize, so it can respond and produce immunity. The linkage helps the immature immune system react to polysaccharide coatings and defend against the disease-causing bacterium.
Examples of conjugate vaccines are Haemophilus influenzae type B (Hib)vaccine, pneumococcal vaccine and meningococcal vaccines in which a non toxic tetanus toxiod or non toxic diptheria protein is used as the link to stimute the immune system.

Toxiod vaccine 

When the cause of an illness is the bacteria releasing a toxin (harmful chemical) that affects the body, a toxiod vaccine can provide protection.  Scientists formulate a vaccine from just the deactivated toxin (called toxiod), rather than the whole bacteria. A toxin can be inactivated by treating them with formalin, a solution of formaldehyde and sterilized water. Toxiods are safe for use in vaccines and the immune system produces antibodies that lock onto and block the toxin. Vaccines against diphtheria and tetanus are examples of toxoid vaccines.

Recombinant vector vaccines

Vaccine antigens may also be produced by genetic engineering technology. Hepatitis B and Human Papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine ( vacine to proterct against cervical cancer) is developed this way.

Advertisements

POverty Alleviation Strategies Followed in India - APPSC G1 Mains - Unit 3

Major Initiatives

2.7 The first such initiative was the Community Development Programme started

in 1952. The programme aimed basically at integrated development at the local level

through co-operation of people and convergence of technical knowledge in various

fields. The Community Development Blocks which were created as local level units

for this purpose across the country at that time exist even today and function as field

level administrative units for many rural development programmes at present as

well..

2.8 The second initiative was taken in the country by introducing the measures

for abolition of intermediary institutions and systems of land holdings such as

Zamindari, Jagirdars etc. The systems were highly exploitative and were responsible

for a caste and land-based nexus perpetuating poverty. This was followed by a

comprehensive policy of Land Reforms. The measures undertaken were based on

the consideration that land was the only productive asset in rural areas. Extension of

the ownership of the land to the poor was, therefore, felt to be an obvious factor to

alleviate rural poverty.

2.9 The third measure adopted was the strategy of Five Year Plan for economic

development. There were Plan-specific strategies towards this end. The first Five

Year Plan focussed on ways and means to immediately tackle the food requirement.

The second Five Year Plan emphasized on the Heavy Industries. In this context it

was felt that the Public Sector would be the leader of the industrialization process in

the country through acquiring the much perceived " commanding height". It was also

expected that there would be a trickle-down effect from the growth based on

industrialization. During Third Five Year Plan the emphasis was again on food grain

production through introduction of new technology in agriculture. The result was a

very successful Green Revolution.

Impact of the earlier Initiatives

2.10 While the achievements through many of the efforts were significant, the

overall impact of the efforts was far from satisfactory to tackle the problem of

poverty. Abolition of intermediary system of land tenure was completed with success,

but land reform which is still an on-going process has not yielded desired results in

terms of either growth or social justice. The success of the Green Revolution was

limited to specific areas and the crops. Green Revolution resulted in inter-crop, interpersonal

and inter-regional disparities across the country. The economy of the

country grew over the years showing significant increase in agricultural and industrial

production. The growth, however, did not contribute meaningfully to the betterment

of the life of the rural poor. The trickle down effect of the development did not work in

India's context. Thus, despite growth, a significantly high percentage of the rural

population continued to live Below the Poverty Line. The poor, including those in the

rural areas, got marginalized in the development process. Poor economic condition,

6

subsistence living and low bargaining power, unstable and undurable employment

opportunities, distress migration to urban areas etc. continued to be the

characteristic features of the poor in India.

2.11 The Community Development Programme also, which aimed community

participation in development, gradually got replaced by more and more of piecemeal

programmes with bureaucratic bias.

A Re-thinking and attempt to attack Poverty directly

There was, therefore, a re-thinking on the need for re-conceptualization of

the programmes and policies. The need for direct attack on poverty was finally felt

particularly during the Fourth Plan period. The 1970s are a significant decade in this

context. Many new programmes including the Rural Works Programmes (RWP), the

Drought Prone Areas Programme (DPAP), the Desert Development Programme

(DDP), the Food for Work Programme (FWP), Programmes for Small & Marginal

Farmers (Small Farmers Development Agency-SFDA, Marginal Farmers &

Agricultural Labourers Agency-MFAL) were all tried in rural areas.

 The programmes basically had objectives to provide three-pronged attack on the poverty i.e.

(i) in terms of creating an income generating asset base for self-employment of the rural

poor, (ii) by creating opportunities for wage employment for the poor and (iii)

area(land)development activities(programmes) in backward regions like dry-land,

rain-fed, drought prone, tribal, hill and desert areas. Subsequently, there were also

programmes for providing basic infrastructures for better quality of life in rural areas

and also programmes for social security of the poor and destitute. In addition, policy

prescriptions were also made and statutory provisions introduced for the

empowerment of the people and their participation in the development process.

Advertisements

Types of Poverty- APPSC G1 Mains - Indian Economy - Unit 3

Absolute Poverty

A measure of absolute poverty quantifies the number of people below a fixed real poverty threshold. Absolute poverty is a level of poverty at which certain minimum standards of living -- for example for nutrition, health and shelter -- cannot be met.

Relative poverty is a poverty measure based on a poor standard of living or a low income relative to the rest of society. Unlike absolute poverty, it does not necessarily imply that physical human necessities of nutrition, health and shelter cannot be met; instead it suggests that the lack of access to many of the goods and services expected by the rest of the contemporary society leads to social exclusion and damaging results for the individuals and families in relative poverty. Measurements of relative poverty are similar to measurements of social inequality

There is a distinction between absolute poverty indices and relative poverty indices. Relative poverty indices are also known as inequality indices. Poverty line is thus measured in terms of absolute poverty. Absolute poverty line can be lower than the lowest income and higher than the highest income.

Relative poverty deals with the socio-economic status of an area. However, absolute poverty is some who is destitute.

Advertisements

Expected Questions - Poverty & Unemployment! - APPSC G1 Mains

Expected questions:

1. Explain the methods of measuring poverty in India?

2. Explain the methods of measuring unemployment in India?

3. What are the properties that determine poverty and explain the reasons why poverty is a major economic issue in developing countries like India?

4. Explain the poverty estimates after independence and types of methods used for estimating poverty in developing and developed countries?

5. Explain why poverty did not reduce that level when compared to economic development Post-reform period?

6. What are the concepts used by NSSO for measuring unemployment and explain the different ways of unemployment in rural India?

7. Wage employment schemes, self employment schemes- which one does you think are the best to ameliorate poverty and unemployment?

8. Discuss the progress of NREGA and explain how this act helped in employment generation?

9. What are the steps need to be taken to improve employment opportunities?

10. What was done to ameliorate poverty?

11. What should be done to ameliorate poverty?

12. What is the status of poverty in India in pre- and post reform period?

13. What are the causes of unemployment?

14 what was done to ameliorate unemployment?

15. What should be done to ameliorate unemployment?

15. Discuss NREGA, its implementation and its pros and cons?

16. What is the status of unemployment in India?

 

Advertisements

Poverty Estimates by Different Committees - G1 mains Unit 3 - Indian Economy

Expert Group Methodology – Lakdawala Committee The Lakdawala Committee defined the poverty line based on per capita consumption expenditure as the criterion to determine the persons living below poverty line. The per capita consumption norm was fixed at Rs.49.09 per month in the rural areas and Rs.56.64 per month in the urban areas at 1973-74 prices at national level, corresponding to a basket of goods and services anchored in a norm of per capita daily calorie intake of 2400 kcal in the rural areas and 2100 kcal in the urban areas. The Expert Group disaggregated the National Poverty lines separately in rural and urban areas into States specific poverty lines in order to reflect the inter state price differentials. For the subsequent years, the State specific rural poverty lines in 1973-74 are updated by using state specific Consumer Price Indices of Agricultural Labourers (CPI-AL). Similarly the urban poverty lines are updated by state specific Consumer Price Indices of Industrial Workers (CPI-IW). Based on the Expert Group methodology, the poverty lines in 2004-05 at all India level were calculated as Rs. 356.30 per capita per month for rural areas and Rs. 538.60 per capita per month for urban areas and estimated poverty ratio as 27.5% (30.17 crore persons).
Tendulkar Committee There had been much discussion about whether the poverty lines underlying these official estimates need to be redefined. Recognizing the need to address these issues, the Planning Commission in December, 2005 appointed an Expert Group under the Chairmanship of Prof. Suresh D. Tendulkar to review alternate concepts of poverty and to recommend changes in the existing procedures used for official estimates of poverty. The Tendulkar Committee submitted its report in December, 2009. The Committee has recommended that the rural poverty line should be recomputed to reflect money value in rural areas of the same basket of consumption that is associated with the existing urban poverty line. The resulting estimate of the all-India rural poverty head count ratio for 2004-05 was placed at 41.8 percent, urban poverty head count ratio at 25.7 percent and at all-India level at 37.2 percent.
Arjun Sengupta Report The National Commission for Enterprises in the Unorganised Sector (NCEUS) set up by Ministry of Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises (MSME) in 2004 brought out a report on Conditions on Work and Promotion of Livelihoods in the Unorganised Sector. In this report, it was reported that 77% of the population had a per capita daily consumption of up to Rs. 20 in 2004-05. The Committee did not provide any justification for using the cut-off amount of Rs. 20 per day. Besides, the estimation of 77% is also erroneous since the percentage works out to 60.5 percent. This fact has also been reported in the Economic Survey 2008-09.
Poverty Estimate by the World Bank In the World Development Indicators 2008 brought out by the World Bank, the global poverty line has been calibrated at US $ 1.25 a day. For India, the percentage of people living below the global poverty line as defined by World Bank has declined from 59.8% in 1981 to 51.3% in 1990 and further to 41.6% in 2005.
Saxena Committee Report The Ministry of Rural Development constituted an Expert Group headed by Dr. N.C. Saxena to recommend a suitable methodology for identification of BPL families in rural areas. The Expert Group submitted its report in August 2009 and recommended to do away from the methodology of score based ranking of rural households followed for BPL census 2002. The Committee has recommended the criteria of automatic exclusion and automatic inclusion of certain sections of society facing deprivations and vulnerability, and that for rest of the people a survey be conducted to rank them on scale of 10 points. The Saxena Committee had also suggested that the national level poverty ratio can be assumed at 50 percent. This is not based on any specific justification.
Latest Position The Mid Term Appraisal of the Eleventh Five Year Plan has indicated that the revised poverty lines for 2004-05 as recommended by the Tendulkar Committee have been accepted by the Planning Commission. These estimates put 41.8% of rural population and 25.7% of urban population as BPL, resulting in a national poverty head count ratio of 37.2%. As the poverty estimates of Planning Commission will continue to be based on the sample survey of consumption expenditure of households to be carried out by the National Sample Survey Organization (NSSO) after an interval of every five years, the next poverty estimates based on the Tendulkar Methodology will be available when the data of 66th Round of NSSO Survey for 2009-10 becomes available in end 2011. The Planning Commission is not aware of separate poverty estimates brought out by any State Government.

Advertisements

G2 New posts added! But G1 new posts addition doubtful!

Advertisements

Ranks & Number of students would come into Mains if posts are added for APPSC Group 1

The Error might + or - 10 students, so its gives some idea for you to calculate whether you will be into Mains
if Extra Posts are added to the Notification

- Its Purely for Reference (its not official)

Marks	Rank	Total No of Students above your rank/marks
116	1	1
114	1	2
113	5	7
112	6	13
111	11	24
110	13	37
109	17	54
108	22	76
107	22	98
106	39	137
105	59	196
104	68	264
103	102	366
102	104	470
101	124	594
100	178	772
Marks	Rank	Total No of Students above your rank/marks
99	210	982
98	252	1234
97	305	1539
96	349	1888
95	390	2278
94	483	2761
93	548	3309
92	566	3875
91	667	4542
90	646	5188
89	743	5931
88	798	6729
87	878	7607
86	855	8462
85	963	9425
84	1032	10457
83	1047	11504
82	1171	12675
81	1278	13953
80	1272	15225
Marks	Rank	Total No of Students above your rank/marks
79	134	15359
78	1389	16748
77	1391	18139
76	1512	19651
75	1528	21179
74	1654	22833
73	1758	24591
72	1756	26347
71	1777	28124
70	1867	29991
69	1806	31797
68	1977	33774
67	2044	35818
66	2108	37926
65	2102	40028
64	2103	42131
63	2142	44273
62	2188	46461
61	2177	48638
60	2258	50896
Marks	Rank	Tota lNo of Students above your rank/marks
59	2251	53147
58	2196	55343
57	2141	57484
56	2076	59560
55	2060	61620
54	2078	63698
53	1925	65623
52	1823	67446
51	1849	69295
50	1648	70943
49	1574	72517
48	1330	73847
47	1260	75107
46	1068	76175
45	1033	77208
44	883	78091
43	800	78891
42	666	79557
41	526	80083
40	448	80531
Marks	Rank	Total No of Students above your rank/marks
39	376	80907
38	290	81197
37	219	81416
36	163	81579
35	140	81719
34	99	81818
33	66	81884
32	51	81935
31	37	81972
30	23	81995
29	22	82017
28	15	82032
27	6	82038
26	15	82053
25	9	82062
24	1	82063
23	4	82067
22	3	82070
21	1	82071
20	1	82072
19	1	82073
18	3	82076
17	2	82078
16	1	82079
15	1	82080

Advertisements