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.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteReviewer’s Name: Stephanie Medeiros
ReplyDeleteDate: Nov. 23, 2011
Partner’s Name and Title of Paper Reviewed: Sarah Machado, Annotating a Scholarly Article
In your own words, fully and with precision, describe what the assignment is asking the writer (your partner) to do? Please use your own words rather than merely quote from the assignment.
This assignment is asking to locate and annotate an article from a scholarly journal and describe what the article is about in the most important key points of that article. The articles can be found on the data base from the library. Also what is important about the article and what is interesting about it. The annotation should be about two paragraphs. In the first or second line, you must have the complete bibliographic information in the format of MLA. It must include the main phrases of the article as what the author states to say. In the second paragraph you must include things such as, the usefulness of that article and why the author chose to write about it.
To what extent has your partner met the expectations of the assignment? Please pick a passage as illustration and describe what works well there. Again, try to use your own words.
I think that Sarah met the expectations of this assignment. She clearly did explain what the article will be about and described the main points she needed to. In the first paragraph, she does a fair job on explaining the summary of this article. In the second paragraph, I feel that she does an excellent job describing the author and what she did like about this article.
What area needs more work? Why? Please pick a passage as illustration and describe what isn’t working.
I think that it could be a little bit shorter and she could stick to the most key points. I also feel that maybe she could add the statistics in the first paragraph, so there can be an idea of what the author is indicating. I do think she could get rid of the last sentence in the second paragraph (So far, there has been no significant proof that the vaccine does in fact cause autism). Also maybe she can add the second and third paragraphs with the first, since it’s summarizing the article.
Please indicate TWO questions about the draft and at least ONE suggestion for ways to improve it.
Why was you interested in this subject?
Was it difficult to fit it all in to two paragraphs?