Vaccine Exemptions Must Be Protected

1211 Words5 Pages
Joseph Mercola in his article “Vaccine Exemptions Must Be Protected” provides data about the nature of vaccinations as well as current outbreak evidence to support his claim that vaccine exemptions should be allowed. He argues that the immunity provided by vaccinations is “inferior immunity” (Mercola 6) in comparison to naturally acquired immunity-antibodies to a disease produced by the body after contracting a disease. If one ignores the false assumptions about the immune system Mercola’s argument appears sound because of all the statistics of “failing” vaccinations. However, Mercola relies on hasty generalization, the fallacy of reaching a hasty conclusion without evaluating all the evidence, to conclude that vaccines are failing. Mercola assumes that natural immunity is 100% effective and will not fail as vaccine-acquired immunity is. Because vaccines are not 100% effective, Mercola argues that people should be exempt from mandatory vaccinations. The implication being that submitting to a vaccine that will fail in the future is putting oneself at unnecessary risk. Mercola’s argument can be reconstructed as follows… 1. If vaccines are not 100% effective, then people should be exempt from mandatory vaccinations. 2. Vaccines are not 100% effective. Therefore, people should be exempt from mandatory vaccinations. Premise 2 depends on Mercola’s use of the fallacy of hasty generalization. He relies on three specific outbreaks (2010 California B. Pertussis, 2010 New Jersey/New
Open Document