Science Writings

by Amy DeLaMare

“The MMR Vaccine Doesn’t Contain ‘Aborted Fetus Debris,’ As RFK Jr Has Claimed. Here’s The Science,” Hassan Vally clearly labels his article. In a time where mis-information and false narratives abound in the news, Vally’s decision to use direct language and respond with fact is crucial, and certainly worth emulating. 

The first weapon in Hassan Vally’s arsenal comes from his subject material. Both vaccinations and abortion are hot button issues: they’re things that people care about. He outright addresses the sensitivity of the subject when he addresses a particular religious hang-up that some people have surrounding vaccination. Vally reports, “Kennedy said ‘aborted fetus debris’ in MMR vaccines is the reason many religious people refuse vaccination.” People have strong opinions about these issues; that’s what makes you want to read about them.

As a writer, I can take inspiration from this as it serves as a reminder to choose subject material that people are impassioned about, and to address it responsibly. Good writers connect with their audience as much as they inform them. Vally does that effectively in this article by appealing to ethos and how readers feel about the material of the article.

 This article also controls the narrative and punctuates the most important pieces of information. Consider Vally’s final line, “What the evidence does show, however, is that vaccines like the MMR vaccine offer excellent protection against deadly and preventable diseases, and have saved millions of lives around the world.” That is what the reader cares about: the good sides of the vaccine, what they are capable of, and a reminder that millions of lives were saved. 

Vally finds success secondly by way of the organization of his article. Readers prefer information to be well organized, splitting it into 3 distinct sections and ending with “the bottom line,” ensures a reader follows along with all information before ending on a summary of the most important take-aways of the article. I can remember to organize my thoughts clearly with distinct sections, and at times asking guiding questions similar to him: “Are there fragments of DNA in the MMR vaccine?” 

Lastly, he fairly reports the misapprehensions while addressing the concerns and making important clarifications. Vally explains that these specific vaccines do not contain any form of DNA, that some contain tiny portions of DNA, but that even when DNA is found in vaccinations “the idea that fragmented DNA in a vaccine could cause genetic harm is false.”

Why does this matter to me as a writer? It’s important to note that he addresses all concerns, acknowledging where they come from. He clarified that not only did RFK Jr spout false information, but that even if a vaccine did have traces of DNA it would be harmless. Misinformation is a big problem we face, and assuring our readers that we are using verifiable truth and scientific fact to address all of their concerns is important. 

Resources: