English Reading Vaccine Analysis

Ronald Dahl’s main claim

Parents who now refuse to have their children immunized are putting the lives of those children at risk.

Roald Dahl’s key supporting points

Measles is a dangerous disease and the risks of measles in children far out way the ricks in immunizations

Roald Dahl’s evidence

Statistic evidence of measles cases + satirical evidence of the risks of vaccination + main evidence is anecdote of daughter

Roald Dahl’s rhetorical strategies

Appeal to emotion (pathos) through anecdote and ethos through his presentation of statistical evidence coupled with logical reasoning.

Roald Dahl’s stylistic strategies

Emphasis on children death like “LET THAT SINK IN”, opinion based language, and comparison to reveal hypocrisy “more chance of your child choking to death on a chocolate bar than of becoming seriously ill from a measles immunization.”

Roald Dahl’s address of opposing view

Addresses reasoning for the logic behind opposing view “ parents refuse, either out of obstinacy, or ignorance, or fear,”

Bob sear’s main claim

Vaccination is important and protective.but it cannot be forced; a parent must give consent

Bob sears’ key supporting points

Vaccinations aren’t harmless to everyone and so they shouldn’t be forced on everyone, measles is being overestimated and isn’t grounds for forced vaccination, and poeple should be the only ones involved in their medical autonomy

Bob sear’s evidence

Numerical evidence of number of severe reactions to vaccination and amount of money paid for their silence, amount of measel cases and the fact it killed no one,

Bob sears’ rhetorical strategies

Ethos- he’s a pediatrician himself so he is a informed source, logos- shows logical evidence for how measles is being overestimated + logically motivation for politicians to be using it as a stunt

Bob sears’ stylistic strategies

Comedic diction to emphasize the overestimation of measles outbreak “but measles? Measles?” , use of the word sacred to emphasize how important the right of informed consent is

Bob sears’ address of the opposing argument

Addresses the viewer and gives them a sarcastic allowance of their opposing decision to emphasize the absurdity of that decision

Steven Weinreb’s main claim

We should not get vaccinated for ourselves alone; we should do it for one another

Steven weinreb’s supporting points

Poeple with suppressed immune systems need protection , disease rates are raising due to the lack of immunization

Steven Weinreb’s evidence

Percentages of the amount of the population needed to be immunized to protect poeple like him, numbers of disease like whooping cough, measles, and the flu raising mostly from unimmunized poeple

Steven Weinreb’s rhetorical strategies

Ethos- anecdote from someone with an actual lack of immunity, pathos for children and poeple like himself, ethos- referencing popular movie media to envoke familiarity in his argument

Steven Weinreb’s stylistic strategies

Comedic diction to draw comparison between his immune system and a child to emphasize his risk caused by other poeple

Steven Weinreb’s address of opposition

Addresses how many “credible” poeple spread the misformation for the opposing argument and how it enforces harmful ideas about vaccines

Ron Paul’s main claim

By ceding the principle that individuals have the right to make their own health care decisions, supporters of mandatory vaccines are opening the door for future infringements on health freedom,

Ron Paul’s supporting points

By giving vaccine companies a captive market, mandates encourage these companies to use their political influence to expand the amount of vaccine mandates. + the same principles that protect the right to refuse vaccines also protect the right of individuals to refuse to associate with the unvaccinated.

Ron Paul’s evidence

Texas legislation that led to outcry regarding the forceful vaccination of younge girls for a disease not common within them, hypothetical slippery slope areas to show the way mandates might lead to.

Ron Paul’s rhetorical strategies

Logos- depends solely on the reader to make recognize the logical connections between mandated vaccines and infringement on liberty. + one court case that is kinda ethos

Ron Paul’s stylistic strategies

Very opinionated diction, hypotheticals to emphasize the absurd nature of the opposing argument, emphasis on words like freedom, private, liberty, etc that relies on mostly American principles to relate and justify their reasoning to the viewer

Ron Paul’s address of the opposing argument

Asks direct question to the opposing argument to try to get them to recognize the slippery slope they are on, hypotheticals to illustrate that as well.