We have begun to understand the ways in which people influence each other throug
ID: 3484980 • Letter: W
Question
We have begun to understand the ways in which people influence each other through our examinations of conformity (Chapter 6), persuasion (Chapter 7), and group influence (Chapter 8). Choose one of the following documentaries to watch (all just under an hour long and available online) and respond to the prompts about how a group, whether it is the government, scientists, or the CIA, influences others.
Remember, the paper should be at least three double-speed, size - font pages (but no more than 6), not including a works cited page, in APA format. You need at least 1 outside reference (not including your textbook or the documentary you choose). It has to be 3 to 5 pages long. Remember, the writing center or Purdue's website are very helpful!
2) Watch the Frontline documentary entitled "The Vaccine War". It is available at http://www.pbs.org/video/frontline-vaccine-war/. While the debate over the use of vaccines is by no means new, it has changed to include the possibility that certain vaccines or scheduling can impact mental healt. What kinds of arguments does each side use to convince others' that they are correct? Is one more persuasive, or does it depend on the audience? What aspects of the messengers and the message do the pro-vaccine and anti-vaccine groups use to their benefit?
Explanation / Answer
Sorry about the long answer, I have managed to use only info necessary to the questions asked. If you require more information, please comment your question below.
Answer:
Facts about the ‘vaccine situation’ around the world in recent times:
Larson, D. H. (n.d.). London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine. Vaccine Safety.
Since the answer to this question and the documentary focuses on the US, the following reasoning will be based with a focus on the US.
History of the Vaccine Debate in the US.:
Firstly, one would have to look at the medical facts and statistics in order to form a resolute and more importantly accurate decision about vaccination, time and dosage of administration etc.
This is because a psychological analysis of any subject will only hold weight when the right and wrong answers have been sharply defined.
For instance, one can effectively offer counselling to a compulsive liar, only when it has been positively determined that lying is wrong and telling the truth more often is socially acceptable behaviour.
Similarly, one would have to prove that administering vaccines to children is either right or wrong in order to stand on the right side of the debate.
Not only that, but the time and dosage of administration of normal, premature and babies with any other conditions needs to be determined on a subjective basis in order to establish deeper intricacies of the matter.
History of Vaccinations:
Right from the year 429 BC, pandemics have been a part of human life.
Sometimes, diseases are spread through animals, unhygienic living conditions and a cohort of causes.
Some of these epidemics are more notable than others. The ‘Black death’ in Europe and the Small pox epidemic among the Native Americans when the colonists began coming to the continent of North America are a few.
On the other hand according to Unicef, a disease like small pox has been completely eradicated by attrition through vaccinations around the world.
The World Health Organization estimates that polio could soon be the next disease that will face the same end as small pox.
Bubonic plague, measles diphtheria has proven to be under control simply through the administration of vaccinations.
Statistics from UNICEF show the following eradication rate:
Smallpox – 100 (Vaccine developed 1797)
Diphtheria – 86 (Vaccine developed 1923)
Whooping cough – 64
Measles – 60 (Vaccine developed 1963)
Neonatal tetanus – 58 (Vaccine developed 1890)
Hepatitis B – 33 (Vaccine developed 1981)
Tuberculosis – 6 (Vaccine developed 1921)
Polio (cases of lifelong paralysis) – 86 (Vaccine developed 1952)
Malaria/other parasitic infections – 0 (Vaccine developed 2015)
HIV/STDs – 0 (no definitive vaccine yet)
Diarrhoea/enteric fevers – 0 (no definitive vaccine yet)
Acute respiratory infections – 0 (no definitive vaccine yet)
What kinds of arguments does each side use to convince others' that they are correct?
The world health organisation confirms that this is a correlation coefficient and not primary data. Considering that a large number of children get vaccinated, and unfortunately some are affected by SIDS, one cannot accurately pin-point that vaccination is the cause. It would be like assuming that all babies who have hair eventually will be affected by the common cold. Such claims need to have a definite causal relationship. Not only that, the WHO, has debunked this myth.
Fighting a parasite that is microscopic, requires constant co-operation from all members of society. Travelers can easily pick up diseases and cause an epidemic. Unless the general population of an area has been immunised, one cannot hope to limit the disease to one person and then cure just one patient instead of a whole area.
Doubts regarding multiple vaccines given at birth and if thery have a harmful effect.
"In the face of these normal events, it seems unlikely that the number of separate antigens contained in childhood vaccines . . . would represent an appreciable added burden on the immune system that would be immuno-suppressive."
This will aid pro-vaccine groups as the parasites a child is exposed to outweigh the possible side effects that come from multiple vaccinations.
Is one more persuasive, or does it depend on the audience?
We live in a world where facts are not always persuasive. Therefore it can sometimes depend on the audience and their understanding of vaccinations. For example: if you take Global Warming, some countries have leaders arguing about what techniques to implement to curb global warming, while the US does have an audience that still argues whether or not global warming is real.
If you let the facts speak for itself, then the benefits of vaccinations outweigh the problems by a wide margin.
What aspects of the messengers and the message do the pro-vaccine and anti-vaccine groups use to their benefit?
The arguments above (question 1) are the basic arguments.
The pro- vaccine audience use the data (message) and the sources like the UN, Pew research and other medically accurate researches by several universities in the US itself.
The anti-Vaccine (Anti-vaccine because of dangers of vaccination and not other reasons like cost etc) use several sensationalized stories and myths. Since there is no definitive research that vaccines are directly linked to congenital issues or diseases.
Related Questions
drjack9650@gmail.com
Navigate
Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.