Noe 1 Tyler Noe Mr.

Newman English 101: Rhetoric 30 September 2013 The Vaccine That Couldnt Vaccines serve one purpose, and that is to protect the public from a certain disease, one that is typically severe. So when a vaccine fails to defend people against a disease, its news. So is the case for the vaccine for pertussis, more commonly referred to as whooping cough. This is brought to attention in infectious disease journalist and author Maryn McKennas article The Pertussis Parable in the October 2013 issue of Scientific American. In this article, McKenna uses disease statistics and expert input to make the point that the pertussis vaccine is a legitimate problem and a difficult situation for the medical community. McKenna alludes to various statistics about pertussis to make her point regarding the vaccine. She first sets the stage by pointing out why no one really recognized the problem with the pertussis vaccine: it was working. McKenna indicates that before vaccines, whooping cough infected as many as 200,000 children each year in the U.S. and killed about 8,000. However, after the vaccine was implemented in the 1940s, McKenna writes that [it] shrank the incidence of pertussis from around 157 cases for every 100,000 members of the population to one in 100,000 (34). It is clear that, off the bat at least, this vaccine worked to fight off pertussis. These statistics prove that the vaccine did in fact drastically lower the number of reported cases of pertussis. But, jump to 2011-2012, and the vaccine seems to have lost its effect. McKenna states that [r]ates of pertussis increased at least threefold between 2011 and 2012 in 21 states (34).

Noe 2 These show that, while the number of reported cases of pertussis were still lower than prevaccine days, there was still a dramatic uptick in pertussis. Not only are there concerns regarding the effectiveness of the vaccine, but also of the safety of the vaccine itself. Due to the way it is created, the pertussis vaccine can cause fevers so high they dangerously inflame the brain. McKenna writes that the vaccine caused permanent brain damage once in every 310,000 doses (34). Through this statistic, McKenna demonstrates that this vaccine is becoming a serious problem in that it not only fails to fully protect against pertussis, but also can seriously damage the individual receiving the vaccine. The statistic also helps solidify McKennas argument that the threat of endangering patients receiving the vaccine puts even more pressure on the medical community to find a better one, however, due to the amount of money and work required for such a search, scientists and pharmaceuticals are reluctant to really dive straight into a new vaccine. Along with solid numerical proof that shows the ineffectiveness of the pertussis vaccine, McKenna references various experts regarding the situation. She first mentions a physician and infectious disease specialist, David Witt. McKenna highlights Witts experience discovering the disturbing trend in reported pertussis cases. According to McKenna, Witt originally thought the outbreak was due to parents not having their children vaccinated, but upon closer inspection, discovered something shocking. McKenna quotes Witt, writing, [t]he bulk of the cases were in fully vaccinated children between eight and 12 years old (34). This quote becomes the platform for McKennas argument that the vaccine is becoming ineffective. It comes early in the article, and is the first real evidence McKenna provides to make her point. She also strengthens her argument by accrediting physician and pertussis expert Tom Clark, who says that, while we need a new pertussis vaccine, the [Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices] cant just

Noe 3 make that happen. That is up to the scientists who would do a study of what would make a better vaccine, and it is up to the pharmaceutical companies (36). By quoting Clark, McKenna is proving that this vaccine, which is proving more and more ineffective and out-of-date, is not an easy problem to fix. There are hoops to jump through to thoroughly solve the issue, and they are not simple hoops. McKenna quite effectively argues that the pertussis vaccine is faulty and needs to be addressed, even though it isnt a simple problem. The implementation of statistics and experts successfully convinces her audience that it is in fact an issue. While she admits in her final paragraph that the vaccine does lead to more mild symptoms if pertussis is contracted, McKennas article is exceptional at making its point.