While proponents argue about the benefits of vaccination for children,...
The argument claims that there is hardly any concrete data to support the benefits of vaccination for children. It further suggests that the efficacy of vaccines is questionable and that vaccines may cause illnesses such as autism. Finally, it presents statistical data comparing the probability of vaccinated children getting diseases versus the national average of all children.
To evaluate the argument effectively, we need to focus on the key aspects and potential flaws in the reasoning. Let's examine each option to see which one addresses these concerns:
(A) What is the ratio of the number of children who are not vaccinated to the number of children who are vaccinated in the country?
This option is the most relevant because it helps determine the vaccination rate in the country. The argument assumes that there is a significant number of children who have not been vaccinated, which could impact the effectiveness of vaccines. Understanding the ratio of vaccinated to unvaccinated children provides important context to assess the argument's claims.
(B) What number of children are vaccinated in the country?
While the number of vaccinated children is important information, it alone does not provide enough context to evaluate the argument. The argument is more concerned with the effectiveness of vaccination rather than the absolute number of vaccinated children.
(C) What percentage of children have access to vaccination and healthcare?
This information is relevant to understanding the overall accessibility of vaccination and healthcare, but it doesn't directly address the argument's claims about vaccine efficacy and potential adverse effects such as autism.
(D) What is the national average of children with autism?
Although the argument mentions the possibility of vaccines causing autism, directly evaluating the national average of children with autism does not address the core claim that vaccines cause the condition. The question of whether vaccines are linked to autism requires specific studies and scientific evidence to assess, rather than relying on national averages.
(E) What is the method used to measure the efficacy of vaccines?
This option is certainly important in evaluating the argument since it directly addresses the concern regarding vaccine efficacy. However, it is less comprehensive than option A, as it only focuses on the measurement method without providing broader context or data.
In summary, option (A) is the most appropriate choice for evaluating the given argument because it directly addresses the vaccination rate by comparing the number of vaccinated and unvaccinated children. Understanding this ratio will help assess the argument's claims about the effectiveness of vaccines.