Monday, September 5, 2011

IBHL Science (Calvin, Deborah, Azri, Regina)

These two articles talk about how people are scared to take vaccine shots, because they have a misguided view that vaccine shots are more dangerous than the virus that the vaccine is supposed to protect them from.

The first podcast concerns about the safety of the H1N1 vaccine to the public.
The second podcast talks about the fear of vaccination shots coming from the media, where they will state their own “fears”, starting controversial debates over whether vaccine shots are lethal or not.

The question that presents itself is: are the negative effects tied to the vaccine through correlation or causation?

In October 2009, 14 year old Natalie Morton died shortly after being given the vaccine that protects against cervical cancer. The vaccine was encouraged to be given to all British girls between ages 12 and 18 since September 2008. However, seeing as Natalie turned pale, stopped breathing, and tragically passed away almost immediately after being given the vaccine, it was logically assumed that the causation of her death lied within the vaccine itself.

However, using biological testing, it was found that the true causation lied within an undiscovered tumor.

This could be correlation because there are biological evidence that the vaccine is not the cause of some of the deaths? However, it can also be causation because everyone responds to the vaccine differently so it may cause negative effects.

We think that it is correlation because biological evidence determines that the cause of death is actually a malignant tumour growth.

The nature of science, in which causation and correlation are huge issues. The general consensus believe that once something precedes the other, it simply is the cause to it. However the truth is that no one knows if that is the truth. We don’t know if the sun will rise again tomorrow, we only assume that it would. We don’t know if a pool ball will move after being struck by the cue ball, we only know that the ball moves after the cue ball touches it. It is not a law that it would move, we only assume that it would, because from experince, it always does. However, this is not enough to establish a law over it, because one day we might encounter a ball that won’t move after the cue ball strikes it.

Similar real life situation raises the TOK questions that is being contested here. For example: an example of causation and correlation is the issue, “violent video games make kids violent”. People believe that if kids play video games, there behaviour will be affected, leading them to believe that violence is okay, leading them to a violent life. A study conducted by Gentile, Lynch, Linder, and Walsh claims that kids that play violent video games for a long period of time tent to be more violent, confront teachers, pick fights with peers, and see a decline in their grades. Another studies said that experienced violent video gamers are more likely to react to sticky situations with violence, because they associate real life with video games. However, violent video game may not affect a teen’s violent behaviour. There is no proof that violent video games cause violence, it could be that the kids are violent to start with, and thus attracted to violent video games.

No comments:

Post a Comment