Explain James Drew's Arguments In Favour Of Vaccines
Is there a vaccine for idiocy? Analysis task
James Drew of the Caboolture Shire Herald (April 12, 2013) forms a convincing argument in favour of vaccines. With an informal approach he amasses evidence, statistics, personal experiences and humour to persuade the reader.
Drew provides a comical introduction, using phrases such as “if there was a shot to immunise against haters of vaccines I’d cop a jab of that elixir right now.”
Drew uses humour as a tool to persuade the readers, which is extremely effective as adding humour to an otherwise informative piece keeps the reader engaged and makes the text memorable.
Drew then informs us of the 77,000 children that are not fully immunised in Australia, his use of statistics adds strength to his arguments convincing the readers that there is a purpose in vaccinations. “The death of children from diseases such as measles, whooping cough, diphtheria, tetanus and infantile paralysis are near non-existent thanks to vaccines,” by sharing this happening a caution arises in the readers minds allowing them to ponder the fact that if everyone was immunised these horrid diseases could be eradicated. …show more content…
Adding a personal anecdote makes the general argument of the text more relatable as it stops relying on abstract knowledge and becomes a concrete example. Drew goes on to mention being a former Army Reservist; this gains him a level of credibility and respect. He describes his appreciation for being injected in the army proclaiming that it saved his life. This solidifies his arguments in favour of vaccines showing his personal experiences and genuine
James Drew of the Caboolture Shire Herald (April 12, 2013) forms a convincing argument in favour of vaccines. With an informal approach he amasses evidence, statistics, personal experiences and humour to persuade the reader.
Drew provides a comical introduction, using phrases such as “if there was a shot to immunise against haters of vaccines I’d cop a jab of that elixir right now.”
Drew uses humour as a tool to persuade the readers, which is extremely effective as adding humour to an otherwise informative piece keeps the reader engaged and makes the text memorable.
Drew then informs us of the 77,000 children that are not fully immunised in Australia, his use of statistics adds strength to his arguments convincing the readers that there is a purpose in vaccinations. “The death of children from diseases such as measles, whooping cough, diphtheria, tetanus and infantile paralysis are near non-existent thanks to vaccines,” by sharing this happening a caution arises in the readers minds allowing them to ponder the fact that if everyone was immunised these horrid diseases could be eradicated. …show more content…
Adding a personal anecdote makes the general argument of the text more relatable as it stops relying on abstract knowledge and becomes a concrete example. Drew goes on to mention being a former Army Reservist; this gains him a level of credibility and respect. He describes his appreciation for being injected in the army proclaiming that it saved his life. This solidifies his arguments in favour of vaccines showing his personal experiences and genuine