6.1.1 Reasoned Analysis and Empirical Claims
Reasoned Analysis
Question at Issue:
Is natural immunity better than immunization through vaccines?
Evidence and Information:
- Studies and research of vaccines
- Historical and current use of natural remedies
- Study of the immune system/human body, ethical and political history
Assumptions:
- Vaccines are better and more effective, natural immunity is not guaranteed, and people prefer natural immunity due to their religious, political, or cultural beliefs.
- Natural immunity is effective in some cases, there is some merit to natural medicine.
Concepts:
- Vaccines
- Viruses
- Natural and modern medicine
- Herd immunity
- Vaccine hesitancy
- Centers for Disease Control (CDC)
- World Health Organization (WHO)
Context:
- Religious
- Political
- Scientific
- Cultural
- Historical
- Medical
Point of View:
- Biological
- Psychological
- Political
- Ethical
Purpose:
- To understand and decipher which type of immunity is more effective through research
- To reason through why the anti-vax community exists and what causes people to fear modern medicine/vaccines
Implications and Consequences:
- An individual cannot control natural immunity, symptoms are not standardized and can vary.
- Vaccines have an adverse effect, some people may react negatively to vaccines. Vaccines offer a high probability of being immune and are more controlled and studied.
Conclusions and Interpretations:
There are pros and cons of both methods, but immunity through vaccines is often more effective and safer than natural immunity.
Disciplinary Lenses
Biology
Question at Issue:
How do vaccines affect the human body and immune system?
Evidence and Information:
- The functions of the body’s immune system
- The human body’s vulnerability to illnesses
- Modern vaccine efficacy
- Standardization of vaccines vs. unpredictability of natural immunity
Assumptions:
- Vaccines are the safest, most effective way to be immune from diseases and viruses.
- Each individual’s body reacts differently, so a vaccine for one person may be the best option, while natural immunity may be better for another.
Concepts:
- Pathogens
- Antigens
- Antibodies
- Memory cells
- The immune system
Context:
- Public health
- Controversy over vaccines
- Covid-19 Pandemic
Point of View:
- Medical professionals
- Virologist
- Biologist
Purpose:
- To understand exactly how vaccines work to prevent illnesses
- To understand how antigens and antibodies work to fight off and destroy pathogens
Implications and Consequences:
- Vaccines reduce the uncertainty that comes along with natural immunity and the risk incurred when getting sick.
- Natural immunity can be effective on an individual level, however, the health and safety of the general population must be considered as well.
Conclusions and Interpretations:
Vaccines utilize the body’s method of creating immunity – without it being necessary to obtain the illness itself. As with all medicine, there is some risk incurred when receiving vaccines, but it is substantially less than the risk involved with natural immunity.
Psychology
Question at Issue: What role does psychology play in vaccine hesitancy?
Evidence and Information:
- Social media algorithms and influence
- Individualistic views and conspiratorial thinking
- Fear of side effects from vaccinations
- Distrust in for-profit medical companies
Assumptions:
- There is little reason to fear vaccinations and modern medicine due to the rigorous scientific research done to ensure safety for the general public.
- The spread of misinformation through social media or news outlets can cause people to distrust the medical system.
Concepts:
- Superstition
- Nonconformist behaviors
- Herd immunity
Context:
- Isolation during the Covid-19 pandemic
- Misinformation through social media
- Mental health in times of crisis
Point of View:
- Anti-vaxxer
- Psychologist
- Medical professionals
- Social media influencer
Purpose:
- To understand why people would prefer herbal or natural remedies and what influences that preference
- To understand what causes hesitation and fear regarding vaccinations and modern medicine
Implications and Consequences:
- Many see natural immunity as being tried and true, whereas the controversy around vaccines often leads people to believe there must be something wrong.
- Since there is so much disagreement over the topic, people can often feel as though those of the opposing viewpoint (pro- or anti-vaccines) are enemies. This can lead to a sense of isolation from one’s community or social group.
Conclusions and Interpretations:
There is an overwhelming amount of evidence to demonstrate that vaccines have a net positive effect; therefore, vaccine hesitancy is often caused by fear or suspicion of the government, herd mentality, and misinformation.
Political Science
Question at Issue:
How do politics influence a person’s decision to accept or reject a vaccine?
Evidence and Information:
- Governmental intrusion on autonomy
- Political polarization
- Foreign disinformation
- Propaganda targeting minorities
Assumptions:
- Political views heavily influence opinions regarding vaccine regulations and policies.
- Individuals will make up their own minds about vaccines regardless of what governments, scientists, and celebrity influencers may say about them.
- Vaccine hesitancy is found on both sides of the political spectrum.
Concepts:
- Bodily autonomy
- Politicization of health
Context:
- Political tribalism
- Mandated health procedures
Point of View:
- Politician
- Legislator
- Civilian
Purpose:
- To understand how people’s political views influence their choices and beliefs regarding vaccinations
- To understand what role politics plays in the development and administration of vaccines
Implications and Consequences:
- The required administration of vaccines can violate an individual’s bodily autonomy and cause people to distrust politicians and governmental policies.
- When allowing people to choose whether to get vaccinated, there is more risk associated with the spread of illnesses.
Conclusions and Interpretations:
In general, people tend to follow the views and opinions of their political party regarding vaccination policies. One’s political views are not always definitive but can have a strong influence on decisions regarding health.
Ethics
Question at Issue:
What moral values and beliefs are relevant when deciding for or against vaccines?
Evidence and Information:
- Religious groups’ stances on vaccines
- Religious leaders’ justifications for or against vaccines
- Role of individualism vs. community values in predicting stances on vaccines
Assumptions:
- People’s morals are often heavily dependent on their religious and political beliefs.
- People’s principles tend to become more conservative when their children are perceived to be in danger.
- Religion can be an integral part of how people find community and form opinions.
Concepts:
- Ethics
- Morals
- Cultural/religious differences
- Faith
- Faith healing
Context:
- Religious
- Cultural
- American
- Covid-19 pandemic
Point of View:
- Believers of various faith groups
- Agnostics or atheists
- Philosophers
Purpose:
- To understand what underlying principles and differing ideas of the nature of the good can influence the avoidance of vaccination
- To understand what underlying principles and differing ideas of the nature of the good can influence an individual to get a vaccination
Implications and Consequences:
- A religious believer may have strong opinions regarding vaccinations based on their respective religious text and how they interpret their own right to religion and bodily autonomy.
- Someone who is not strongly influenced by religion will likely turn to differing sources of information regarding vaccinations and bodily autonomy; for example, recent scientific research or their own personal moral code.
Conclusions and Interpretations:
Individuals often form personal beliefs based on their religious background, which can heavily influence their decisions when it comes to getting a vaccine.
Empirical Claims
Inductive Reasoning
True Premise 1: I utilized a natural remedy to overcome a sickness.
True Premise 2:I felt better as I was taking the natural remedy, then became healed.
Weak Inductive Reasoning: No one needs the vaccine because the natural remedy healed me and made me immune. (Argument relies on anecdotal evidence and makes a hasty generalization, drawing a grand conclusion on the basis of a sample size of one.)
Logical Conclusion: While I might be lucky to have experienced relief with a natural remedy (on the basis of my body’s chemistry or genetics, or the small viral load I was carrying), my personal experience does not counteract the vast numbers of people quickly and effectively immunized through vaccines, nor the vast numbers of people falling gravely ill because they were not immunized.
Deductive Reasoning
True Premise 1: Natural remedies can boost the immune system to help heal sicknesses.
True Premise 2: People have been using natural remedies to heal the sick for thousands of years.
Weak Deductive Reasoning: Therefore, humans should rely on natural remedies to achieve natural immunity. (This argument relies on the genetic fallacy; just because people have been using natural remedies for a long time doesn’t mean that is the best or safest method now.)
Logical Conclusion: We now have vaccines, which are much more consistently effective. Especially for people with underlying health issues, natural remedies may not be strong enough, so vaccines are the safest and most efficient option to achieve immunity.
Abductive Reasoning
Observation: My friends and family members who got the COVID-19 vaccine got sick a few days after they got the shot.
Weak Prediction: The shot is more dangerous than the disease. (Argument ignores relevant evidence.)
Best Prediction: Side effects from vaccines are common, temporary, and very mild in most cases, especially in comparison to the number and duration of symptoms and even fatalities resulting from the disease itself.