> Ideally we’d want neutralizing vaccines wouldn’t we? ... I just want vaccines that aren’t subscription services.
I think you're mixing up concepts here. What kind of immune response a vaccine elicits (neutralizing antibodies vs. immunoglobulins vs. B-/T-cell response or some combination of the above) and how long it remains efficacious needn't have anything to do with one another, and vaccines that confer non-sterilizing immunity can still very effectively prevent disease spread. Lots of vaccines don't confer sterilizing immunity and still work very well. Unrelatedly, lots of vaccines' efficacy also fades with time (e.g., MMR, TDaP, varicella, both Hep vaccines, etc.), and those can also be very effective and valuable.
Obviously ideally you'd have a one-and-done, totally sterilizing vaccine for every ailment, but we take what we can get.
> I think Salk did an excellent job at testing it’s effects without forcing participants and there’s a great deal of historical data to prove it
The one that sometimes causes polio isn't the Salk vaccine (that's IPV), it's the Sabin vaccine (OPV), which uses a live attenuated virus -- see https://www.who.int/immunization/diseases/poliomyelitis/endg... for more info. But the Sabin vaccine is still widely used, because it's easier to administer (no needles), this particular issue is rare, and it generally works better than IPV does, because it elicits a gut-tissue response instead of a serum response, and polio is a fecal-oral route pathogen. Like I said: tradeoffs.
I think you're mixing up concepts here. What kind of immune response a vaccine elicits (neutralizing antibodies vs. immunoglobulins vs. B-/T-cell response or some combination of the above) and how long it remains efficacious needn't have anything to do with one another, and vaccines that confer non-sterilizing immunity can still very effectively prevent disease spread. Lots of vaccines don't confer sterilizing immunity and still work very well. Unrelatedly, lots of vaccines' efficacy also fades with time (e.g., MMR, TDaP, varicella, both Hep vaccines, etc.), and those can also be very effective and valuable.
Obviously ideally you'd have a one-and-done, totally sterilizing vaccine for every ailment, but we take what we can get.
> I think Salk did an excellent job at testing it’s effects without forcing participants and there’s a great deal of historical data to prove it
The one that sometimes causes polio isn't the Salk vaccine (that's IPV), it's the Sabin vaccine (OPV), which uses a live attenuated virus -- see https://www.who.int/immunization/diseases/poliomyelitis/endg... for more info. But the Sabin vaccine is still widely used, because it's easier to administer (no needles), this particular issue is rare, and it generally works better than IPV does, because it elicits a gut-tissue response instead of a serum response, and polio is a fecal-oral route pathogen. Like I said: tradeoffs.