Arguments

   

           Rogerian Argument

     With more and more students taking online courses, both students and the colleges benefit. For example, students save money for transportation and colleges save money for institution. In addition, students can have a more flexible schedule and be able to study easier and colleges will be able to provide educations outside its premier. However online education does have some drawbacks. For instance, online education lacks social interactions, which can be a problem for students who are need of face-to-face assistant and students may lack in self discipline because online education has no method of making students study more.

 These problems could be easily solves. First, students could enroll in hybrid courses by attending physical classes and online classes, which solves the problem of no interactions with other students/teachers. Second, students that go to physical classes the professor can help disciple the students to work. If these problems are addressed both students and colleges would benefit because students will keep their flexible schedule and college will save money.

Toulmin Argument  

     Many college and universities have instituted online education programs. These programs are the best way to educate students and save money. If colleges are going to meet teh rising demand for education, they need to need to install online education in their courses because it will help expand the college and save money. The online course I took helped my busy schedule and I was able to attend classes that wouldn't be possible if my college did not have an online course. Recent studies show that many students prefer online classes over regular classes because the students are able to work in the luxury of their home and have classes fit their tight schedule. 

Should HPV Vaccines be Mandatory?

     In the article by Ellen M. Daley, she argues that HPV vaccines should be mandatory because it can greatly reduce the deaths from the leading cause of cancer, cervical cancer. Vaccines have been identified as the "most significant public health achievements in the last 100 years"(Gaul, "The A Mandatory HPV Vaccine Will Save Lives). Many previous vaccines have proven to effective, vaccines have eradicate small pox, measles, polio, and many other diseases.

The new HPV vaccine has been created to help reduce cervical cancer and so have been effective, but this vaccine have been the most effective when given to young girls near the age of 11-12. Screening programs have also significantly reduce the amount of deaths from cervical cancer, but not all women have the ability to go have a screen test. This is why the vaccine is useful because it can be available to all women and help reduce the amount of people infected with the disease.

Many people who are opposed to the development of the HPV vaccine are uncomfortable with the thought of having their children to be taking a vaccine to help prevent a sexual transmitted disease, but Daley provides the blunt answer of having to ignore the thoughts of their children of being sexual active and support the vaccine to keep their children safe. Also Daley asked the question of if the disease was for men only it would women be see the development in the vaccine?

Moira Gaul created the article "The HPV Vaccine Should Not Be Made Mandatory" because the vaccine is flawed and it is the parents choice of deciding if their children should take a flawed vaccine. The HPV "will not prevent infection with all strains of HPV that cause cervical cancer"(Gaul, The Limitations of the HPV Vaccine), since the vaccine will not prevent all of the HPV diseases there is no reason to have this vaccine to be forced into young children. It is the parents decision to allow their children to take a flawed vaccine and their are other alternative paths to reduce the chances of contracting the disease. The single most effective solution is to reduce the sexual activities to lessen the chances of contracting the disease.

I believe that the HPV vaccine should be mandatory because it can do more positive things then bad because even though it is not perfected yet it can still be developed to help reduce or eliminate the disease, similar with polio or measles. Having the parents consent should not ignored, but their judgement may be blinded because the parents are uncomfortable of talking about the topic of sexual activities and their children together.

Having the vaccines given out is a gain all or lose none situation because even though it won't protect the patient from all HPV diseases, but it still does protect the women in some shape or form. There is no harm from ordering that vaccines to be mandatory other than the parents' complaints of having their consent ignored. I believe the vaccine will be help widely and given enough time it will be able to help a lot more people and reduce the infected people in the world enormously.



Daley, Ellen M., and Robert J. McDermott. "A Mandatory HPV Vaccine Will Save Lives." Should            Vaccinations be Mandatory? Ed. Noël Merino. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2010. At Issue. Rpt.            from "The HPV Vaccine: Separating Politics from Science—a Commentary." American Journal          of Health Education 38.3 (2007): 177-179. Opposing Viewpoints in Context. Web. 16 Oct. 2016.

Gaul, Moira. "The HPV Vaccine Should Not Be Made Mandatory." Sexually Transmitted Diseases.            Ed. Laura Egendorf. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2007. At Issue. Rpt. from "Family Research              Council Statement Regarding HPV Vaccines." 2006. Opposing Viewpoints in Context. Web.                16 Oct. 2016.