Should Children be used to boost adults immunity to diseases?

Sounds a bit far fetched, right?

However, in the U.K. this actually is something that happens without much thought. If you are not aware, in the U.K. it is not part of a child’s vaccination program to be vaccinated against Chicken Pox.

Now, this is partially due to the general trend that Chicken Pox is usually quite a mild disease, and not often does a child have a serious reaction. There is also the cultural belief that it’s better to contract Chicken Pox as a child, rather than as an adult where symptoms can be more serious.

However, there is further reasoning as to why the vaccine isn’t available nationwide publicly (you can pay if you go private). And that’s for the following reason:

Once you’ve contracted Chicken Pox, you’re then leaving access to develop shingles later in your lifetime. For people in the U.K. where Chicken Pox isn’t vaccinated against, Shingles is a higher risk issue.

Although, a U.K. based study showed that adults who are exposed to children with Chicken Pox are 25% less likely to develop Shingles, due to immune system boosts when coming into contact with the disease again.

Effectively, children contracting Chicken Pox helps their adult counterparts from the onset of Shingles. And in turn, once they get older the children they’re in contact with will effectively protect them from the onset of Shingles.

Question:

1. Is it fair to put the responsibilities of protecting older generations from Shingles on the shoulders of younger children?

Counter scenario:

Research indicates that if a nation wide vaccine was introduced publicly to the U.K., there could be an uplift in Shingles cases in adults could last for 30-50 years, after the vaccine is introduced.

2. Is it cost effective to introduce a vaccine program that could lead to more adults being at risk of Shingles in that time period?