Annotation (2nd draft)

Vaccination: a public health intervention that changed history and is changing history

Stein, Richard A. "Vaccination: a public health intervention that changed history & is changing with history." The American Biology Teacher 73.9 (2011): 513+. Academic OneFile. Web. 16 Nov. 2011.

            In the article, the author, Richard Stein, analyzes vaccinations and their abilities to eradicate diseases. He uses statistics to compare the death rates due to diseases throughout history, and how they have significantly decreased since vaccinations were developed. Stein claims, “Global life expectancy at birth, ~28.5 years in 1800 and ~31 years in 1900, increased over the past two centuries in the developed world, and over the past 50 years in the developing world, almost exclusively as a result of reduced mortality from infectious diseases.”

Stein provides the negative aspects as well as the benefits of vaccines. By exploring both sides of the spectrum, he is showing an unbiased view. He provides the facts, which are in favor of vaccines. He explains the side effects of vaccines such as the minor swelling, tenderness, and pain, as well as the more serious effects such as allergic reactions and possible seizures. These side effects can easily be overlooked when compared to the amount of lives vaccines have saved. The more serious effects usually only appear in a small percentage of people. The rest of the people greatly benefit from the vaccine by being immune to the disease it is protecting against.  Stein also gives insight into the debated topic of whether or not certain vaccines cause autism in children. Studies are being conducted in order to prove that the link between the mumps-measles-rubella (MMR) vaccine and autism exists. Some parents are cautious about getting their children vaccinated and some refuse to get their children vaccinated altogether. So far, there has been no significant proof that the vaccine does in fact cause autism, and the vaccine has done more good than harm.

            Stein concludes that new fields of science pertaining to vaccination and immunization are developing, and existing ones are becoming stronger. He claims that new fields of vaccine science have opened doors leading towards the development of personalized vaccines based on individuals that are safer and more efficient.

            Stein, author of The American Biology Teacher, makes a strong point about the significance of vaccinations. He does well at putting into perspective the impact that vaccines have made on mortality throughout history, and how they are constantly being altered to be safer and more efficient. He backs all of his claims with sources that are relevant and appear to be credible. What I like most about this article is that he shows both the positive and negative sides of vaccines. He does not try to convince people that they are flawless. He explains that problems have been linked to them, gives examples of those problems, tells why people refuse to have themselves or their children vaccinated, and then explains why the benefits outweigh the negative effects.

Post-Write: I feel somewhat confident about this draft. I took the advice from the class peer review and tried to work it into the paper. I dedicated a paragraph to the pros and cons of vaccines and I tried to fix the third paragraph. Do I still sound too repetitive throughout the annotation? Did I succeed in emphasizing the positive affects?

Annotating Scholarly Articles

Vaccination: a public health intervention that changed history and is changing history

Stein, Richard A. "Vaccination: a public health intervention that changed history & is changing with history." The American Biology Teacher 73.9 (2011): 513+. Academic OneFile. Web. 16 Nov. 2011.

                In the article, the author, Richard Stein, analyzes vaccinations and their abilities to eradicate diseases. He uses statistics to compare the death rates due to diseases throughout history, and how they have significantly decreased since vaccinations were developed. Not only does Stein explain the benefits of vaccinations, but he also explains the negative aspects. He explains the side effects of vaccines such as the minor swelling, tenderness, and pain, as well as the more serious effects such as allergic reactions and possible seizures.

                Stein also gives insight to the debated topic of whether or not certain vaccines cause autism in children. Studies are being conducted in order to prove that the link between the mumps-measles-rubella (MMR) vaccine and autism exists. So far, there has been no significant proof that the vaccine does in fact cause autism.

                Stein concludes that new fields of science pertaining to vaccination and immunization are developing, and existing ones are becoming stronger. He claims that these new fields such as “vaccinomics”, introduced in 2007, which incorporates concepts from immunogenetics and immunogenomics, has opened doors leading towards the development of personalized vaccines based on individuals that are safer and more efficient (pg 7).

                Stein, an author from The American Biology Teacher, makes a strong point about the significance of vaccinations. While he is clearly in favor of vaccinations, he addresses that there are some complications that go along with them. He does well at putting into perspective the impact that vaccines have made on mortality throughout history, and how they are constantly being altered to be safer and more efficient. He backs all of his claims with sources that are relevant and appear to be credible. What I like most about this article is that he shows both the positive and negative sides of vaccines. He does not try to convince people that they are flawless. He explains that problems have been linked to them, gives examples of those problems, tells why people refuse to have themselves or their children vaccinated, and then explains why the benefits outweigh the negative effects.

Proposal (2nd draft)

Lower Cafeteria Prices

            Anyone who has been to school has been in a cafeteria, and has most likely bought the school lunches. But, has anyone noticed the prices, and how they keep increasing?

            At Bristol Community College, the first thing I noticed was the cafeteria prices were much higher than I had expected. My initial thought was “How am I going to afford this?” As a full time college student, I am only able to work two days a week due to my schedule. The money I earn goes towards gas and car insurance, the money left over, if any, goes towards what I need such as food. Therefore, I cannot afford to spend $5.50 for a meal, not including a drink, four days a week.

            This increase has been occurring in high schools nationwide. The costs have been going up by as much as twenty five cents per year, such as at Apponequet Regional High School in Lakeville, Massachusetts, where I attended. This does not sound like much, but in high school, where many people do not have jobs, it can be. An article from The New York Times states, “Under the child nutrition bill signed by President Obama in December… School districts are required to start bringing their prices in line with what it costs to prepare the meals, eventually charging an average of $2.46 for the lunches they serve” (Santos). Since schools are being required to serve healthier meals, the ingredients are more expensive. This forces the schools to raise the prices in order to be able to keep serving the lunches. This can place a financial burden on students and their families. Although students of families who are financially struggling can receive free or reduced priced meals, the price increase may not be financially feasible for the families who are struggling to make ends meet, but do not qualify for reduce priced meals (Santos). We need to find a way to make lunch affordable for all students.

            Simply lowering the cost of the food may not be feasible cost wise for the college or other schools, but there are other ways to ensure that students will be able to afford lunch. Instead of having to buy a water bottle for $1.50, the school could put a water cooler in the cafeteria. This would not be a major financial burden for the school (some water coolers can cost as little as $46), and it would cut prices for the students. Another solution is to start a meal plan. Instead of paying daily for food, students could have the option to pay weekly. The students who decide to pay weekly would pay a flat rate that would save them money. For example, if meals cost $5.50 per day, the students who decide to pay per week will pay a flat rate of $20. If the average student goes to school four days a week, they will be saving $2 a week. This in combination with the water cooler could be saving the student up to $8 per week, while not placing a huge financial burden on the school.

            Every student should be able to afford to eat lunch. Nobody should be refused lunch based on their financial state. By adding the water cooler and creating a meal plan, affording meals will become easier for the student.

Post-Write: I feel more confident about this draft. I added more reasons to support my solution, and I added more information from the source. My conclusion needs to be stronger, and I need to direct my proposal at a specific audience. I am not sure who to the proposal should be addressed to, though. Are my reasons for supporting my cause strong enough? Is my solution a feasible one?

                                                                 

Proposal Assignment

Lower Cafeteria Prices

            Anyone who has been to school has been in a cafeteria, and has most likely bought the school lunches. But, has anyone noticed the prices, and how they keep increasing?

            At Bristol Community College, the first thing I noticed was the cafeteria prices were much higher than I had expected. My initial thought was “How am I going to afford this?” As a full time college student, I am only able to work two days a week due to my schedule. The money I earn goes towards gas and car insurance, the money left over, if any, goes towards what I need such as food. Therefore, I cannot afford to spend $5.50 for a meal, not including a drink, four days a week.

            This increase has been occurring in high schools nationwide. The costs have been going up by as much as twenty five cents per year, such as at Apponequet Regional High School in Lakeville, Massachusetts, where I attended. This does not sound like much, but in high school, where many people do not have jobs, it can be. An article from The New York Times states, “Under the child nutrition bill signed by President Obama in December… School districts are required to start bringing their prices in line with what it costs to prepare the meals” (Santos).

            Simply lowering the cost of the food may not be feasible cost wise for the college or other schools, but there are other ways to ensure that students will be able to afford lunch. Instead of having to buy a water bottle for $1.50, the school could put a water cooler in the cafeteria. This would not be a major financial burden for the school, and it would cut prices for the students. Another solution is to start a meal plan. Instead of paying daily for food, students could have the option to pay weekly. The students who decide to pay weekly would pay a flat rate that would save them money. For example, if meals cost $5.50 per day, the students who decide to pay per week will pay a flat rate of $20. If the average student goes to school four days a week, they will be saving $2 a week. This in combination with the water cooler could be saving the student up to $8 per week, while not placing a huge financial burden on the school.

Post-Write: Right now, this is just the bare minimum of the paper. I state a problem, I provide some research, and I give a solution. I think it is a pretty good start. I have to provide more evidence, such as more quotes and information from the source I have, and maybe another source. I also need to add a conclusion. Would the solution I provide be a feasible one? How can I make the argument stronger?