Essay On Inoculation In Boston
Inoculation In Boston: A Disqualified Innovation In 1979, the World Health Organization announced the eradication of smallpox in the world. Since then, the use of vaccines has drastically improved public health around the world. The practice of vaccinations derived from inoculation, an old medical practice dated back to China in the fifteenth century. Despite the fact that people understood little about viruses during that time, inoculation similarly utilized the same principle as vaccinations—pre-exposing healthy individuals to little amounts of viruses to allow the body to naturally gain immunity to them. Although people in the past practiced inoculation, why did diseases, such as smallpox, still spread widely and cause thousands of
…show more content…
Blake reports, "Some maintained that it was a sin for a healthy person to bring the sickness upon himself … and that he should in submission to God's will leave it to Him to determine whether or not he would suffer the disease." Since a majority of the population consists of Puritans, many believed that smallpox represented God’s wrath and any attempt to prevent smallpox is an act against God’s will. As a result, the society rejected inoculation because it contradicted their core values. Moreover, not only were the common people not familiar with inoculation, doctors in the town also refused to inoculate healthy individuals because they failed to see how infecting healthy people allowed the patients to gain immunity against viruses. Furthermore, people expected inoculation to increase the spread of the disease rather than to contain it. Under the influence of religious beliefs and the lack of understanding of viruses, people rejected inoculation as it was incompatible with their values, and expectations. Rogers claims in another point, that innovation must include trialability for society to adopt it. Without testable results to compare the innovation to current ideals, society will not adopt the innovation as depicted by the example of Iowa farmers adopting hybrid-seed corn that Rogers provides. These farmers tried the new seeds while still planting other normal ones, which allowed them
Blake reports, "Some maintained that it was a sin for a healthy person to bring the sickness upon himself … and that he should in submission to God's will leave it to Him to determine whether or not he would suffer the disease." Since a majority of the population consists of Puritans, many believed that smallpox represented God’s wrath and any attempt to prevent smallpox is an act against God’s will. As a result, the society rejected inoculation because it contradicted their core values. Moreover, not only were the common people not familiar with inoculation, doctors in the town also refused to inoculate healthy individuals because they failed to see how infecting healthy people allowed the patients to gain immunity against viruses. Furthermore, people expected inoculation to increase the spread of the disease rather than to contain it. Under the influence of religious beliefs and the lack of understanding of viruses, people rejected inoculation as it was incompatible with their values, and expectations. Rogers claims in another point, that innovation must include trialability for society to adopt it. Without testable results to compare the innovation to current ideals, society will not adopt the innovation as depicted by the example of Iowa farmers adopting hybrid-seed corn that Rogers provides. These farmers tried the new seeds while still planting other normal ones, which allowed them