Talk:Assessment of the health impacts of H1N1 vaccination: Difference between revisions

From Opasnet
Jump to navigation Jump to search
mNo edit summary
(Darm exercise 4 instructions added)
Line 1: Line 1:
[[Category:DARM exercise]]
==[[Darm]] exercise 4==
'''Tasks:
* Make pairs and select one group A-E (D and E have Finnish material).
* Look at page [[Discussion]] for theoretical and practical advice. Also page [[:op_fi:Keskustelun jälkijäsentäminen]] may be useful.
* Look at the two or three links on your group's page.
* Read the texts and try to identify arguments about the use of Pandemrix. Not that arguments can be (and most are) indirect arguments.
* Rewrite the arguments in such a way that they can be understood outside the original context.
* Place the arguments into a hierarchical tree of attacking and defending arguments pointing toward the main statement about Pandemrix use.
* You can also make up your own arguments, or if you have extra time, read additional material (see end of the page).
* When each group has done their own part, there will be a general discussion about all argumentations by the groups. All argumentations will be merged onto this page based on the discussion.
== Pandemrix should not be used because of narcolepsy risk ==
== Pandemrix should not be used because of narcolepsy risk ==


Line 15: Line 28:
* [[Talk:Assessment of the health impacts of H1N1 vaccination/Group B]]
* [[Talk:Assessment of the health impacts of H1N1 vaccination/Group B]]
* [[Talk:Assessment of the health impacts of H1N1 vaccination/Group C]]
* [[Talk:Assessment of the health impacts of H1N1 vaccination/Group C]]
* [[Talk:Assessment of the health impacts of H1N1 vaccination/Group D]]
* [[Talk:Assessment of the health impacts of H1N1 vaccination/Group D]] (Finnish material)
* [[Talk:Assessment of the health impacts of H1N1 vaccination/Group E]]
* [[Talk:Assessment of the health impacts of H1N1 vaccination/Group E]] (Finnish material)




Revision as of 21:30, 31 March 2011

Darm exercise 4

Tasks:

  • Make pairs and select one group A-E (D and E have Finnish material).
  • Look at page Discussion for theoretical and practical advice. Also page op_fi:Keskustelun jälkijäsentäminen may be useful.
  • Look at the two or three links on your group's page.
  • Read the texts and try to identify arguments about the use of Pandemrix. Not that arguments can be (and most are) indirect arguments.
  • Rewrite the arguments in such a way that they can be understood outside the original context.
  • Place the arguments into a hierarchical tree of attacking and defending arguments pointing toward the main statement about Pandemrix use.
  • You can also make up your own arguments, or if you have extra time, read additional material (see end of the page).
  • When each group has done their own part, there will be a general discussion about all argumentations by the groups. All argumentations will be merged onto this page based on the discussion.

Pandemrix should not be used because of narcolepsy risk

How to read discussions

Fact discussion: .
Opening statement: Pandemrix should not be used any more anywhere because its narcolepsy risk is too high.

Closing statement: Resolution not yet found.

(A closing statement, when resolved, should be updated to the main page.)

Argumentation:

⇤--1: . Despite risks, Pandemrix is an effective vaccine and has clearly net positive effects in countries where emergency treatment is poorly available for severe swine flu cases. --Jouni 23:05, 31 March 2011 (EEST) (type: truth; paradigms: science: attack)

←--2: . The reputation of Pandemrix is globally so poor that it is impossible to use it any more. --Jouni 23:05, 31 March 2011 (EEST) (type: truth; paradigms: science: defence)

←--3: . In Finland, THL decided to stop the use of Pandemrix. --Jouni 23:05, 31 March 2011 (EEST), [1] (type: truth; paradigms: science: defence)

Discussion groups:


Additional material:

Retrieved from "https://en.opasnet.org/index.php?title=Talk:Assessment_of_the_health_impacts_of_H1N1_vaccination&oldid=19780"