Vaccines

Video #1

Part 1:

For this video, fill in FUN FACTS about how the vaccines and how they work:

(Sabin)Polio Live Vaccine	Similarities Between Both	(salk)Polio Dead Vaccine
1.virus is alive but weakened 2.oral liquid 3.90% effective after 3 doses 4.cell mediated immunity triggered(t cells kill infected cells) 5. Can be passed on from person to person	1.Got rid of polio in western world 2.virus can not cause harm to the body 3.humoral immunity triggered (b cells) 4.contain a form of the polio virus 5. Can be administered to healthy people	1.99% effective after 3 doses 2.injected 3.virus is completely dead 4.more expensive 5.does not interfere with immune system when more than one enterovirus at a time

Part 2:

What was the purpose of this video? How does the producer of the video use rhetoric to support their purpose? Give three pieces of evidence from the video to support your claim. (Example of evidence can be narrator’s tone, the information presented, information not presented, music played, and/or images shown.)

• Sal uses an informational tone to convey ethos, that he continues this throughout the video. This calm almost monotone voice really speaks to how he is only going to be going over the scientific aspect of this problem.
• Sal presents factual scientific information (like explanation of how the two versions are different) in order to give the audience information and information only. This allows him to appeal to a scientific and studious pathos  
• Sal uses a formal logos that shows clear info and logic backed up by reasoning in order to remove most opinion from this video. For example he logically walks us through when each type should be used instead of just presenting facts he explains them in a logical way.

Video #2

1. What diseases do vaccines prevent?
1. Protusus
2. Polio
3. Varicella
4. Rotavirus
5. Strep sepsis
6. Meningitis

2. What is herd immunity?
1. According to vaccines.gov “When a critical portion of a community is immunized against a contagious disease, most members of the community are protected against that disease because there is little opportunity for an outbreak. Even those who are not eligible for certain vaccines—such as infants, pregnant women, or immunocompromised individuals—get some protection because the spread of contagious disease is contained.”
2. This is challenged when people get exemptions from vaccines
3. This causes the herd immunity to become less strong
3. What does it mean to be immunocompromised?
1. A medical term that means that your immune system can not get rid of pathogens as effectively as a normal person could an example could be a chemo patient

4. What kind of people would be considered immunocompromised?
1. Chemo patients
2. Old or young people
3. People who are already infected to a different virus

5. How does herd immunity help people who are immunocompromised?
1. Helps them by making viruses that are vaccinated less common so it reduces the chance that an immunocompromised person would be exposed

6. What does it mean to “exempt vaccines”?
1. To get a legal allowance to not have a child be vaccinated by opting out

7. What two ways can parents “exempt vaccines”?
1. Personal or religious beliefs

Part 2:

What was the purpose of this video? How does the producer of the video use rhetoric to support their purpose? Give three pieces of evidence from the video to support your claim. (Example of evidence can be narrator’s tone, the information presented, information not presented, music played, and/or images shown.)

• Purpose: bring sensational light to the

• The producers of the video choose a narrator with a deep intelligent voice to exude an ethos of intelligence and authority on a controversial matter as to calm the human need for controversy.
• The video presents both sides of the argument to show logos in comparing both sides of the discussion but gives much less time to one side. By giving some representation of the opposing side in the last video the producer tries to make you feel that the examination is logical and covers all bases.
• The video is made appealing to a wide pathos by using sensational words like “war” on vaccines. This stirs up passion and emotion, which can distract a watcher from true introspective thought.

Video #3 (For today, just watch the first 16 minutes of this video to complete the activity)

Part 1:

1. What is the theory behind vaccines?
1. Prime immune system to defend against certain things and next time you are exposed have quicker response

2. What is the stigma around a person who questions vaccines?
1. That they are immediately against all vaccinate in any form or type
3. What is “informed consent”?
1. Whenever you do a medical procedure you have to inform about benefits, risks, and alternatives

4. Do doctors give “informed consent” to patients on vaccines?
1. To a legal extent yess but handing a piece of legal document to a family to save time should not be enough

5. Who controls vaccine laws?
1. The state government controls instead of federal

6. What is California’s vaccine law? (Not mentioned in video, please Google it.)
1. Only medical exemptions

7. How much knowledge do doctors receive about vaccines in medical school?
1. Very little about what is inside effects or choices just benefits and when you can give them

Part 2:

What was the purpose of this video? How does the producer of the video use rhetoric to support their purpose? Give three pieces of evidence from the video to support your claim. (Example of evidence can be narrator’s tone, the information presented, information not presented, music played, and/or images were shown.)

• Purpose: bring light to problems in vaccine administration and education and opinions
• The video is presented as "the truth" about vaccines as if to suggest someone is lying to the viewer, and the only way out is to trust them. This creates false authority by necessity.
• The documentary immediately starts out with an explanation as to why questioning vaccines isn't the same as being completely anti-vaccine. The documentary does this early on as not to dissuade a pro-vaccine audience from watching.
• Also the documentary use title blocks under speakers with their qualifications. They are kinda hard to read but just having them there is meant to affirm us that the information is coming from a qualified individual.

Summary Questions:

 

1. What is the “vaccine war”?
2. The vaccine war is a "conflict" of ideas that people have of vaccines. Some believe that vaccines are the only option and are to be administered always, and some question this. Over time this difference of ideas has become more and more aggressive. People who question vaccine usage are often labeled as anti-vaccine.

2. How has media shaped the “vaccine war”?
3. Media has caused ideas to spread faster and allowed for dramatization, not a discussion of topics. videos like the first and last, do not allow for discussion but simply a dramatized representation of a topic that does both sides a disservice.

3. How has researching vaccine ingredients, learning about the immune system, and watching three videos with separate agendas helped you?
4. I have not changed my position on whether kids should be administered. Doctors should be better introducing risks and be getting more education on the vaccines. But I believe that they are necessary to maintain herd immunity.