Hello, I'd like some feedback on an AWA essay I wrote. The prompt is from the Kaplan GMAT 2017 book. Thanks!
Prompt
The following appeared in a memo from a staff member of a local health care clinic. "
Many lives might be saved if inoculations against cow flu were routinely administered to all people in areas where the disease is detected. However, since there is a small possibility that a person will die as a result of the inoculations, we cannot permit inoculations against cow flu to be routinely administered."
Essay
In his memo, the staff member asserts that the vaccine against cow flu should not be administered in a widespread fashion due to the possibility of death as a result of administration of the vaccine. The staff member additionally acknowledges that inoculation against cow flu has the potential to save many lives. However, the staff member's assertion lacks key evidence which severely undermines the argument.
First, the memo does not describe the relative risks of death from either cow flu or the inoculation against it. If, for example, the risk of death from vaccination is hundreds of times smaller than the risk of death from cow flu itself, it may be a pragmatic tradeoff to administer the inoculation routinely. Without this evidence, the staff member may be supporting a more deadly plan of action by not inoculating against cow flu routinely. The memo also does not describe the incidence of other, non-fatal, side effects of both cow flu and the inoculation against it, which is important to properly assess the risks of inoculation.
Furthermore, the staff member does not consider the values and beliefs of his broader community. While the chance of death may exist, many individuals - informed of the risks - may still choose to receive the inoculation. They may be social workers, doctors, parents, pregnant mothers, teachers, or other people that come in contact with those with weaker immune systems, like the elderly or children. The staff member's memo does not account for these values.
Separately, additional reasons to not vaccinate broadly may exist and could be presented. For example, widespread inoculation may cause the cow flu to mutate and make the existing vaccines less effective or ineffective. Additionally, the health clinic may not have a large enough stock of vaccines to inoculate everyone in areas where cow flu is detected.
In conclusion, the staff member needs to provide more evidence to support his argument. Primarily, information about the relative risks of harm from the inoculations and from cow flu itself should be presented. The staff member should also consider other factors such as the values of the community and the stock of vaccines available to the clinic. Without this evidence, the argument is unconvincing.
close
03 Aug 2019, 18:40
