Source Based Essay #1

Introduction

Throughout the past twenty years, the debate about vaccinations has taken off to new heights. Parents are confused about whether they should listen to doctors or their friends and afraid to injure their children by making the wrong decision, and doctors are tired of repeating their lectures over and over- vaccines are healthy and do not harm children. New information pertaining vaccines, such as formerly eradicated diseases reoccurring in the world, is released daily. Where each American stands on this issue, and whether each parent will vaccinate their children or not, will determine the health of the future generations.

Scholarly Source Author: Stanley A. Plotkin

Summary: While the whooping cough vaccine has decreased the number of infected children, the side effects of the vaccination are quite severe and include convulsions and hypotonic episodes. In the 1990s, there were several attempts to fix this problem by creating a new vaccine, but research has shown there has been little success. Vaccinated children grow immune to the vaccine in a few years, and the number of infected children began to grow. As of now, there are no whooping cough vaccines in low-income countries. As a result, this is not a worldwide issue, and a vaccine for whooping cough is not considered an urgent issue.

Purpose: The purpose of this scholarly source is to inform vaccine researchers about the current issues with a whooping cough vaccine. Plotkin gives little opinion on the issue and explains the results of studies where animals and children have received whooping cough vaccines and what the results were.

Audience: The audience of this scholarly source are vaccine researchers and immunologists. Due to the complex scientific language used in this article, Plotkin is not attempting to write for parents of young children, or teenagers. This is an article clearly written for those who have received higher level education and for those wanting to know what the current stance on this vaccine is.

Genre: The genre of this scholarly source is a scientific article, which was written for the Journal of Clinical Investigation, a journal about medical science and scientific research. In the scientific article, Plotkin uses phrases such as, “baboons vaccinated with wP and challenged with B. pertussis were resistant to both disease and carriage of the organism” that make this source a scientific article, and not just an article one would read in a daily newspaper.

Stance: Plotkin’s stance in this article is that creating a whooping cough vaccine is too difficult at this time due to studies proving sample whooping cough vaccines resulted in health problems later in life. Plotkin does not word his article with opinionated language instead he remains neutral and does not give an indication of a position. The formalness of the article is indicated by the scientific language written such as, “Many reasons for the recrudescence of pertussis, including improved diagnostics, variation in secular pertussis trends.”

Rhetorical Situation: Plotkin wrote this scientific article discussing why a vaccine for whooping cough is not a simple vaccine to create. In particular, Plotkin is responding to one specific study by stating at the end of his article, “these results indicate that T cell phenotype may be fixed early in life and may create problems for efficacy later in life.” In his article, he is responding to these results and discovering that other studies have similar results, thus proving his point about the difficulty of creating a whooping cough vaccine.

Newspaper Article Source Author: Keith Klugman

Summary: Klugman’s newspaper article discusses statistics, mainly the number of children that die from diseases, and uses those statistics to inform readers about the importance of herd immunity. The article continues to explain the creation of the pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV) and the spread of the vaccine through countries in South Africa, as well Gambia and Rwanda. The author stays hopeful that the vaccination will continue to stay effective in order to protect children and decrease the number of children dying in Africa. The author supports vaccinations and supports his argument to continue vaccinations with YouTube videos of vaccines and compelling statistics and data evidence.

Purpose: The purpose of this article is to educate parents about PCV. Klugman is opinionated in his article; he gives facts that support his argument and mentions a call to action. He mentions that, “pneumonia is responsible for 17% of deaths in children under the age of five in sub Saharan Africa”. This fact educates readers on pneumonia and the importance of herd immunity, facts that the audience likely did not already know.

Audience: The audience of this article is parents of young children. Klugman is trying to reach parents, by mentioning the importance of herd immunity. When Klugman says, “…protects those among us who are the most vulnerable to getting sick, such as newborn babies, the elderly, or those with health conditions” he is discussing the importance of being vaccinated to parents, wanting them to vaccinate themselves and their children.

Genre: The genre of this news article is a feature, because there is a lead, or hook, that introduces the reader to the topic, an African proverb, and the article is supplemented with a YouTube video that supports Klugman’s argument. The article is short and to the point- give children PCV. Klugman is attempting to connect with readers emotionally by consistently discussing the importance of protecting our children. This feature is non fiction because the vaccine being mentioned is real.

Stance: The main idea of this article, strength in numbers, is effectively demonstrated with Klugman pushing to vaccinate more children in more countries. At the end of the article Klugman says, “When we each do our part, not just for ourselves but for our neighbour, our village, our country and our continent, we can defeat pneumonia.” This is a persuasive statement revealing Klugman’s passion for vaccinations.

Rhetorical Situation: Klugman wrote this article to persuade parents to vaccinate their children. Klugman cares about the health of the future generation and is using his voice to tell parents to vaccinate their children. Given that Klugman explains herd immunity in the article, he is responding to studies about children that have died from not being vaccinated. He realizes that herd immunity is the simplest way to protect children and increase the number of living children in Africa.

Magazine Article Source Author: Kate Sheridan

Summary: This magazine article discusses the possibility of a vaccine for strep throat developing. While many people, from Bill Gates to pharmaceutical companies, disagree with Sheridan and say this vaccine is a “low priority”, Sheridan discusses the deaths strep throat causes, and how a vaccine could prevent those deaths. Over $200 million is spent annually on strep throat, and not only would a vaccine lower that cost, a vaccine would also decrease strep throat’s side effects, such as scarlet fever and toxic shock syndrome. Sheridan concedes that right now there simply is not enough money for the development of a strep vaccine.

Purpose: The purpose of this magazine article is to persuade pharmaceutical companies to create a strep throat vaccine. The article states its reasoning, “The group A streptococcus bacterium, the microbe responsible for strep, causes 616 million cases of sore throat each year worldwide.” and after mentioning the unlikely chance of a strep throat vaccine being created in the near future ends the article with a chilling statement, “In the world of vaccines, death is one thing the commercial powers can’t ignore.”

Audience: The audience of this magazine article is pharmaceutical companies. Sheridan wants these companies to read this article and be persuaded to begin work on a strep throat vaccine. That is why Sheridan uses strong scientific language, because her audience already knows what vaccines and strep throat are. Instead of using simple phrases, Sheridan implements statistics of death rates and the financial costs of strep throat to appeal to her readers, because Sheridan knows this tactic will be most effective.

Genre: The genre of this magazine article is scientific journalism because the article sprinkles scientific language through the entire piece along with numerous facts about strep throat and vaccines. The sentence, “The group A streptococcus bacterium, the microbe responsible for strep, causes 616 million cases of sore throat each year worldwide” evidences that Sheridan is writing a scientific article due to the scientific language used.

Stance: Sheridan supports the creation of a strep throat vaccine, but admits that the creation is still many years away. Sheridan’s stance on a strep throat vaccine is passionate because she mentions numerous facts about the dangers of strep, such as “An untreated infection can lead to scarlet fever, flesh-eating infections and toxic shock syndrome” along with the need for a strep throat vaccine.

Rhetorical Situation: Sheridan wrote this article in order to address pharmaceutical companies, because they do not see the need for a strep throat vaccine while Sheridan does see the need. Sheridan disagrees with this group for she mentions, “But two researchers… disagree–and in light of a recent spike in deaths, rising antibiotic resistance and a litany of other issues caused by this seemingly manageable infection, they may just be right.”

Open Web Source

Summary: This website does not have a direct author, but the “About Us” page mentions that the Immunization Action Coalition launched the website in 2002. Throughout the website, information ranging basic knowledge to advanced is given about vaccinations, and vaccine-preventable diseases. The website divides information based off age group, featuring information on infants, children, preteens, teenagers, and adults. The website also has three subdivisions for health care professionals, the public, and coalitions, all featuring vaccine information catered to each division.

Purpose: The purpose of this website is to educate people about vaccines. The website features general knowledge about vaccinations and remains neutral on the topic.

Audience: The audience of this website are teenagers, adults, and parents. For example, on the Preteen and Teen pages, there is a section titled “Vaccines You Need”, explaining that some vaccines wear off by the time someone reaches their teenage years, and they need another round of vaccines. This is information directly aimed at teenagers.

Genre: The genre is an informational website, as the website features information about vaccines. The creators of this website, the Immunization Action Coalition, give advice and extensive knowledge about vaccines and preventable diseases.

Stance: The creators of this website are opinionated and pro vaccination, such as mentioning, “Parents want to do everything possible to make sure their children are healthy and protected from preventable diseases. Vaccination is the best way to do that.”

Rhetorical Situation: This website’s creation is in response to misinformation that has been spread about vaccinations. The creators hope to convince people to vaccinate themselves and their children through creating the website. They state true facts about vaccines to clear up any false information that has been spread.

Relationships

Both the scholarly source and magazine had the same genres: scientific articles, and both the newspaper and open web source had the same purpose: to educate the audience about vaccines. The scholarly source and magazine had the same conclusion to their articles as well: the vaccination in question is too difficult to create at this moment in time. This connects to the newspaper and open web source having the same stance: everyone must be vaccinated. While each source was from a different category and each source discusses different types of vaccines, each source discussed the importance of vaccines and the positive effects they have. With the sources having different audiences’ different types of people, from parents to vaccine researchers, are reached out to with information concerning vaccination.

Works Cited

Klugman, Keith. “When It Comes to Vaccines, There Really Is Safety in Numbers. Here’s              Why.” Bhekisisa, 4 Sept. 2018, bhekisisa.org/article/2018-09-04-00-when-it-comes-with-             vaccines-there-really-is-safety-in-numbers-heres-why.

Plotkin, Stanley A. “Composition of pertussis vaccine given to infants determines long-term T     cell polarization.” Journal of Clinical Investigation, vol. 128, no. 9, 2018, p.     3742+. Academic              OneFile, http://link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/A553759895/AONE?u=cuny_ccny&sid=A             ONE&xid=3c0bee57. Accessed 30 Sept. 2018.

Sheridan, Kate. “Strep Vaccine Could Save Lives and Reduce Health Care Costs–So Why Don’t             We Have One? What will it take for pharmaceutical companies to create a viable strep            vaccine?” Newsweek, 9 Mar. 2018. Opposing Viewpoints in            Context, http://link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/A529463218/OVIC?u=cuny_ccny&sid=OVI             C&xid=ccdc0b9c. Accessed 30 Sept. 2018.

“Vaccine Information You Need.” Vaccine Information You Need from the Immunization Action              Coalition, Immunization Action Coalition, www.vaccineinformation.org/.