My Discussion Assignment.

You are asked to complete a two page seminar paper in support of your stance or position in relation to the “For or against the destruction of small pox stocks” and present your findings to the group for an open discussion.  You should read closely the article provided and provide evidence of additional reading via a bibliography. 

One of the first articles I read about the destruction of the small pox stocks was the one that is in the “Wall Street Journal” and was published on May 25^th 2011 and was written by Betsy Mckay.  The way in which the article has been written shows both sides of the issue but still puts across that to destroy the stocks would have no benefit in the grand scheme of things.  The facts are set out in the first four paragraphs with also a brief history being included. 

Right through to the end Betsy Mckay is using both sides of the argument to inform the reader but somehow she still persuades the reader that to destroy the stocks would be a bad idea.  Another article I read was one on the website www.virology.ws which was written by Vincent Racaniello.  This is an article that is against destroying the vaccine, included in it is also a poll and updated information from the WHO.  With the information I have gathered and after reading various different publications it does seem that to destroy the smallpox stocks would be the wrong thing to do.

Because the Wall Street Journal article is for informative purposes and is trying to inform its readers that the small pox destruction has been delayed it has to give both sides of the story.   Although the way it has been written – focusing more on the need to keep the stocks makes the reader believe that this is the right thing to do.  The use of the sentence “a compromise that will enable scientists in the U.S and Russia to continue researching” in the first paragraph makes the reader straightaway think that it must the right thing to do because scientists are still researching and cannot research without the stocks. 

Once the author has given some historical facts about small pox and how it was “eradicated more than 30 years ago” she then goes on to use quotes directly from Nils Daulaire who also portrays that the outcome was the right one.  Using quotes from a professional is a good way to win the confidence of the public.  People believe that if a professional has made a statement then it must be correct. 

In my opinion, this article has been written well and does not directly tell the reader what they should be thinking.  When I first read this I was undecided on the opinion I was going to take but the clever use of official quotes and facts makes you sit back and believe that the stocks must be kept.  I feel that this article is the right mix of fact and opinion without being over bearing and biased.  The statement about the countries keeping the stocks to “develop vaccines and antiviral medications” gives confidence to the reader and helps them to see the importance of keeping the stocks. 

There are many arguments for and against keeping the stocks but at the moment they are causing no harm and are being used in the correct manner – medical research.  If there were to be an outbreak of small pox tomorrow these stocks would be vital to help produce a cure.  If your loved one suddenly became ill from small pox, and these stocks had been destroyed this could have a detrimental effect on their health which could lead to death.   

With this in mind and having read numerous articles, I believe that keeping the vaccine is for the best – at least until scientists are sure that if there was an outbreak tomorrow, in a week, in a month – whenever, that they are suitably prepared for it to try save as many lives as humanly possible. 

Bibliography and References

Mckay, B. (2011). Smallpox - Destruction Deadline Gets Delayed. The Wall Street Journal.

Hammond, E. (N.D). Smallpox virus stocks at the 64th WHA: Implementing the Conclusions of the Major Review. Third World Network.

Racaniello, V. (2011). Should smallpox virus be destroyed?. Available: http://www.virology.ws/2011/03/17/should-smallpox-virus-be-destroyed/.  Last accessed 19th April 2013.

Riley-Smith, Ben. (2011). Should we destroy smallpox forever, asks WHO?. Available: http://www.theweek.co.uk/politics/5485/should-we-destroy-smallpox-forever-asks-who . Last accessed 17th April 2013.

Parry, W. (2011). Proposed Destruction of Smallpox Virus Creates Controversy. Available: http://www.livescience.com/13667-smallpox-virus-destruction-variola-vaccination.html  Last accessed 17th April 2013.

Tucker, J. (N.D). The Smallpox Destruction Debate: Could a Grand Bargain Settle the Issue?. Available: http://www.armscontrol.org/act/2009_03/tucker . Last accessed 19th April 2013.