Political Paralysis
How many children will we need to paralyze to eradicate polio forever? Increasingly, as we approach the ultimate goal of eliminating a crippling disease once and for all from the planet, we must confront this grim calculation. Until the turn of this new century, the naturally-occurring—or wild—polio virus was the primary way for the disease to reach its human hosts, causing illness, debilitation, partial or total paralysis, even death, usually of children, almost always in remote villages ill-served by health agencies. But since the certified eradication of Type 2 polio, and the near elimination of Types 1 and 3, the primary way polio infects its hosts is, I hesitate to say it, through our own inoculation campaigns.
The twentieth-century eradication of smallpox must have emboldened us to imagine that ridding the world of polio would be a matter of course. After all, according to Donald Henderson’s “The Eradication of Smallpox—An Overview,” smallpox had killed 300 million people in the 20th century alone, “more than twice the death toll of all the military wars of that century.” Compared to that massive, almost always deadly scourge, polio, which paralyzed children but killed few and was almost never contracted by adults, must have seemed like an easy target for elimination.
But polio turned out to be a different case altogether: less deadly but sneakier, more resistant to both serums and human effort.
First of all, smallpox is easy to spot. As Henderson again notes, this time in “Countering the Posteradication Threat of Smallpox and Polio,” smallpox is readily visible. Sufferers are covered over most of their body with distinctive purulent poxes. Unlike polio, which can hide in the body for years while its bearers infect others, smallpox advertises its presence and makes intervention much more likely. Imagine trying to rid the world of a disease that has more than 200 asymptomatic carriers for every paralyzed patient.
Second, polio vaccines need to be administered several times, on a schedule, to be effective. Whereas for smallpox, again according to Henderson, a single dose of vaccine immunizes nearly 100% effectively, polio requires at least three doses of Oral Polio Vaccine (OPV). And fewer than six doses might not achieve a 90% protection against the predominant strains: types I and III. In stable communities with the enthusiastic support of the local population and health agencies, inoculating every child under five with six doses of anything on a scheduled basis would be seemingly indomitable. But, add to that the social and environmental instability of the areas where polio is endemic (Afghanistan, Pakistan, North and West India, and Nigeria), where flood, famine, and warfare shred the social fabric, and the job seems beyond human capability.
Finally, the vaccines themselves can infect patients with the virus. This is the most insidious and infuriating frustration of the fight against polio. What at the start of the campaign was an almost negligible nuisance factor (if lifelong paralysis can be discounted) of 1 case per 3 million doses of vaccine, has become—tragically and ironically—a much more significant drawback of the seemingly endless effort to finally eradicate polio.
Aylward and Tangermann relate the confident enthusiasm of the polio eradication campaign of the early 1980s, fueled by a strong start and rapid success.
By the year 2000, the incidence of polio globally had decreased by 99%. . . . By 2002 . . . the Americas, Western Pacific and European Regions had been certified polio-free. By 2005, . . . wild poliovirus (WPV) had been interrupted in all but 4 ‘endemic’ countries: India, Nigeria, Pakistan and Afghanistan, where eradication efforts effectively stalled.
Momentum is everything in eradication campaigns. The effort is global and requires the cooperation of entire continents. Adversaries in everything else need to put aside their differences—sometimes even calling cease-fires on battlefields—to cooperate in delivering preventive measures to diverse populations regardless of their race or nationality. What had occurred so naturally in the eradication of smallpox needed to occur again if polio was to be eliminated. Henderson described it this way:
The scope of the smallpox program was unprecedented. It required the cooperation of all countries throughout the world and the active participation of more than 50. It was a universal effort unlike any that had ever been undertaken. Most countries eventually proved to be readily responsive but strong persuasion was necessary for some. National antipathies were generally set aside.
In both efforts, the vast majority of the population in endemic countries were inoculated in the early years. And in both cases complications of population movement, natural disasters, maddening bureaucracy, and dislocations of regional conflicts and civil wars frustrated the mass inoculations. But the polio campaign has not yet overcome the elemental differences of the two diseases that make the ultimate elimination of polio so much less likely.
Like the smallpox campaign, the effort to eradicate polio scored impressive early successes. According to Aylward and Tangermann, “By the year 2000, the incidence of polio globally had decreased by 99% compared with the estimated number of cases in 1988 . . . and the last case of polio due to wild poliovirus type 2 transmission anywhere in the world was recorded in Uttar Pradesh, India in 1999.” And then the effort stalled.
Polio is not smallpox: obvious, defenseless, stable. It’s nefarious, invisible until it strikes, and mutable. The 1% of cases that persisted after 2005 began to mutate. The world had failed to wipe out the last of the last viruses. Some children had only mucosal immunity while the virus thrived in their intestines. The carriers looked healthy but passed the virus to others undetected, especially in the toughest places, the remote villages and refugee camps where sanitation was crude at best and healthcare nonexistent.
And while the agencies assigned to eradication tried to counter the mutations with customized variations of the Oral Polio Vaccine to meet local conditions, mounting resistance to an intrusive, expensive, and seemingly endless global eradication effort weakened the support needed to force the effort past the last 1%. According to Taylor, Cutts, and Taylor, in the American Journal of Public Health, “Negative effects were greatest in poor countries with many other diseases of public health importance.” It’s not hard to imagine the reluctance of villagers in India, for example, whose children routinely die of diarrhea, objecting to the massive effort to eliminate polio, which many have never seen, and which does not kill.
There was blessed, magnificent, altogether positive enthusiasm at the UN, at the WHO, at Rotary International, in the 1980s, that the world could once again achieve with polio the triumph of man over disease that had been accomplished against smallpox. But similar efforts achieve similar results only when conditions are similar, and smallpox and polio are too different for the same formulas to work.
References
Aylward, B., & Tangermann, R. (2012, April 06). The global polio eradication initiative: Lessons learned and prospects for success. Retrieved February 12, 2018, from https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264410X11015994?via%3Dihub
Henderson, D. A. (2002, January 01). Countering the Posteradication Threat of Smallpox and Polio | Clinical Infectious Diseases | Oxford Academic. Retrieved February 12, 2018, from https://academic.oup.com/cid/article/34/1/79/312029
Questions for You
Answer with a Reply below.
- How is this a Definition Essay? It doesn’t define polio, smallpox, or eradication.
- What is the clearest and briefest statement of the thesis of this argument?
- What differences between polio and smallpox make it less likely that polio can be eradicated?
777sunflower777
babyyoda1023
bloguser246
Urbie
ANONYMOUS
coldice234
confusedpinky
coolraccoon318
davidbdale
eric cartman
gingerbreadman27
hdt1817
hockeyplayer
hotgirlsemester
hurtnowitzki
koolsaxophone
ichverdustehier
indigo143
jreggie20
kevinjames
ladybug122718
laflame
maxxpayne
millycain
nothingxtoxsay
planefan25
propel78
puffer
rebelpilot64
stoneharbor91
sunflower828
JetsFan2
thad711
thefirstmclovin
TheFrogSprog
thekidfrombrooklyn
tonysoprano44
chich_
youngthug03
Counterintuitive Fall 2023 
-It is a definition essay because it reveals the severity of the diseases. It doesn’t give a dictionary definition of polio, smallpox or eradication, but it gives a clear indication of what they are and how important/severe they are.
-The clearest and briefest statement of the thesis is that “smallpox and polio are too different for the same formula to work”.
-Polio is not detectable until the infection has taken place- as the text says, “Polio is mutable until it strikes”. This makes it extremely difficult to know who has polio, therefore we cannot give someone treatment if we do not know if they have polio.
1. It is considered a definition essay because it, “technically”, defines polio and smallpox by explaining how they effect people, the death rates of them, and simple compare/contrast analysis. The essay also explains eradication by using statistics and describing how polio had almost been completely gone, but that it had broken out again and had never achieved 10 years of no cases (the definition of eradication). This enables the reader to understand what the terms mean without using a dictionary definition.
2. The main argument of the thesis is that polio and smallpox have received different support for being eradicated, and that they are different diseases. Therefore, polio and smallpox require different strategies when attempting to eradicate them. (smallpox has already been eradicated, of course)
3. Polio is invisible until it strikes, as well as mutable, more resistant to serums, and it is not as deadly as smallpox. Meanwhile, symptoms of smallpox are very visible, and it is a very deadly disease. For these reasons, the diseases are very different, and due to their differences the momentum and effort to eradicate polio is less involved than it was for smallpox.
1. It is considered a definition essay because the paper describes how polio affects human hosts by causing illness, debilitation, partial or total paralysis, even death, usually of children,and almost always in remote villages ill-served by health agencies. The paper also explains the inoculation campaign methods as well as using statistics to highlight the death and mutation rates and the number of cases. Lastly the paper mentions countries where the polio epidemic occurs. Although the essay doesn’t give a dictonary defintion of polio, by using statistics, facts and other information conducted from reserach studies, this makes the essay considered to be a “defintion essay”.
2. The clearest and briefest statement of the thesis is that smallpox and polio require different medical technqiues for eraditcation
3. Polio requires different medical techniques than smallpox becuase the dieases is readily visible (Sufferers are covered over most of their body with distinctive purulent poxes), polio on the other hand can hide in the body for years while its hosts infect others. Polio is also mutable and more resistant to oral vaccinations. Also polio has shown to have higher death rates than smallpox. Polio can only be detectable when the host shows symptoms which makes the disease harder to treat.
The main difference is the control and eradtication stratgies for both dieases**.
1. It would be considered a definition essay because it talks about what the diseases do to people and how to recognize them without giving a textbook definition, but still giving readers a sense of what the diseases are.
2. The clearest statement of the thesis would be “smallpox and polio are too different for the same formulas to work.
3. Polio is harder to detect. Someone doesn’t know that they have it until it comes about, so it is hard to completely destroy.
1. Even though the medical definition of the disease was not given, the essay still describes important factors of the disease, the effects it has on people, and the long history it has.
`2. ” as we approach the ultimate goal of eliminating a crippling disease once and for all from the planet, we must confront this grim calculation”
3. Polio cannot be directly seen on the skin like smallpox does, and it can lie dormant in the body for a long period of time while continuing to spread to other individuals. Polio is also very resistant to serums and human efforts.
1. It is a definition essay even though it doesn’t straight up state the definition, but because it says the affects and expresses the severity of the disease. It tells possible outcomes of having the disease and indicates the severity of it.
2. The clearest statement I see in the thesis is…smallpox and polio are too different for the same formulas to work.
3.Polio is something that can’t be tracked until someone is diagnosed and has it. Its untraceable till your diagnosed with it. Therefore, its much harder to eliminate since you can’t do anything till someone already has the disease.
1. It is a definition essay because throughout the essay it defines what the disease is capable of doing and who it will greatly affect.
2. The clearest and briefest statement is that polio and smallpox are two completely different diseases that won’t allow the for the same formula to work.
3. Smallpox can be visible to the human eye and polio cannot which means polio is much harder to be diagnosed without being tested for.
This is a definition essay because it describes how polio and smallpox’s affects people. It doesn’t just come out and say the textbook definition of polio but it tells the tragic affects and indicates what these sicknesses can do to the people that contracts it.
The clearest and briefest statement of this thesis is that polio and smallpox are very different illnesses that wont allow for the same formula to work.
The differences between polio and smallpox that make it less likely that polio is eradicated is because polio can’t be detected until the person contracts it, which makes the medical treatments very difficult and very different for that of smallpox’s. This also means that it is much harder to get rid of is they only time you can try to fight it is when you find out the person has it.
1. This is a definition essay because of the way that it portrays polio and smallpox. The essay explains how these illnesses affect people. Although there isn’t a specific definition the essay explains the topic in other ways.
2. The clear & brief statement of this essay is polio and smallpox are very different and use different methods to treat them.
3. There are many differences between polio and smallpox. Smallpox can be visibly seen on a person whereas polio is harder to detect.
1. This is considered a definition essay because the essay describes what polio does to people who get the disease without giving an actual dictionary definition.
2. For me personally, the clearest and most brief statement of the essay is polio and smallpox are very different and use different methods to treat them.
3. Smallpox can be seen on people while Polio is not visible and is harder to find.
How is this a Definition Essay? It doesn’t define polio, smallpox, or eradication.
What is the clearest and briefest statement of the thesis of this argument?
What differences between polio and smallpox make it less likely that polio can be eradicated?
1. This is a definition essay as it defines characteristics of polio and the attempts to eradicate it and uses a comparison with smallpox to better characterize it.
2. The most concise statement of the essay was the final summarizing statement.
3. Some differences that make polio more difficult to eradicate include: the disease’s ability to remain undetected within a host, the strict scheduling requirements of the vaccine, and socioeconomic disorder in the affected regions.
1. This is a definition essay because it doesn’t give the reader a dictionary definition but goes on length about what polio is and the affects of it.
2. The clearest and briefest statement of the thesis is that polio and smallpox are two different things and should be treated in two different ways.
3. The difference between polio and smallpox makes it less likely that polio can be eradicated is that smallpox is easy enough to be seen. When you have smallpox you can see bumps on your skin, but polio is not physical a child can have it and you wouldn’t be able to tell by looking at them.
1. The essay is a definition essay because the essay talks about smallpox and polio and its effects on children and it shows how the diseases are similar on paper but when it comes to eradication they have to be attacked differently.
2. Small pox and polio may be similar but they require different methods and procedures to eradicate.
3. Polio does not have visible symptoms until it is actually contracted but with small pox you can see the marks on a patient’s skin.
1: This would be considered a definition essay because it explains what Polio does and how to affects people. It doesn’t give a clear definition about polio but with context clues it allows people to understand how it affects people and more specifically how it affects children.
2: The clearest and briefest statement of the thesis of this argument would be that smallpox and polio, although are very similar, are also not similar and could not be eradicated the same way. These two diseases need to be treated differently in order to have a greater outcome.
3: The differences between polio and smallpox that makes it less likely for polio to be eradicated is that polio is able to remain un-noticeable or undetected unlike small pop which can be easily seen. The laces polio affects is also a huge difference that allows it to not be cured just yet.
Places*
1. This is a definition essay as, tells us the characteristics of polio and smallpox and how based of their characteristics only one of the diseases could be fully eradicated.
2. To summarize the article smallpox was able to be eradicated but we cant determine based of that, that polio can also be eradicable because the two are not the same.
3. The difference between polio and Smallpox is, polio is harder to find on someone while smallpox is quite visible and easy to find,.
This was a definition essay because it defines whether or not Polio can be eradicated. The question of the definition is not defining what Polio is, but can Polio be erased from the active list of diseases.
The clearest and briefest thesis of the essay can be defined as, Is Polio similar enough to Smallpox in the sense where it can be eradicated?
The largest difference between Smallpox and Polio is the fact that Smallpox leaves pox on the infected and they can be isolated for the disease to run its course and potentially avoid affecting others. Polio on the other hand has no outward signs of infection until the disease strikes you down. This allows for Polio to be spread by the unaware for a fair amount of time until the host dies or is paralyzed.
1.This Definition essay is good but doesn’t define polio, smallpox, and/or eradication.
2.The clearest and briefest statement of the thesis of this argument is “Smallpox and polio are two different for the same formula”.
3.The difference between polio and smallpox is that polio is a parasite that is transmitted in feces that when it gets in the body it could paralyze the host and could not be noticeable for years. Smallpox is a disease that shows up on the skin in many bumps across the body so it’s easy to spot instead of making it harder making it easier to find a cure.
1-This is a definition essay due to demonstrating how crippling polio is and the severity of diseases. This essay does not define polio, smallpox or eradication, but it does explain the importance of each and their effects.
2-The thesis of this essay is polio and smallpox are too different for the same formula to work, however, the clearest statement that stood out was “Imagine trying to rid the world of a disease that has more than 200 asymptomatic carriers for every paralyzed patient”.
3-The differences between polio and smallpox are stated as follows “Unlike polio, which can hide in the body for years while its bearers infect others, smallpox advertises its presence and makes intervention much more likely”. Polio being able to “hide” within the body makes it less likely to be eradicated.
10/11
1. This definition essay is alright but it doesn’t really define to us what polio, smallpox, or eradication really is.
2. The clearest and briefest statement of the thesis of this argument is that “But polio turned out to be a different case altogether: less deadly but sneakier, more resistant to both serums and human effort.” The argument gives us only some facts about what polio is to people and what it means.
3. The difference between polio and smallpox is that polio is like a virus that can affect your brain and spinal cord and leave you to be paralysis or dead. But it’s hard to find as it can live inside your body. Smallpox is seen as a disease that’s caused by the variola virus, which causes people to have fevers and skin rashes. An is easy to find when you see thousands of bumps all over your body.
1. This is a definition essay since it provides great amounts of information to the reader and they are able to take away the definition of polio without having to read it directly.
2. The clearest and briefest statement in this argument is the one sentence paragraph that reads; “But polio turned out to be a different case altogether: less deadly but sneakier, more resistant to both serums and human effort.”
3. Through reading the essay, a conclusion could be drawn that polio is much more aggressive than small pox and it can live inside of the intestines of humans who can considered to be “asymptomatic carriers”, who could still spread the virus.
1. This is a definition essay because it does not define what polio, smallpox, or eradication means. Instead, it states facts about the severity of polio and attempts to prove that the analogy between polio and smallpox cannot be compared because the two diseases are vastly different.
2. The differences between polio and smallpox are too different, so we cannot use smallpox as an analogy to eliminate Polio.
3. Polio is invisible and mutable while smallpox is obvious and stable. These two differences are extremely important which can work towards proving that polio is less likely to be eradicated (at least in the same way that smallpox was).
1. This is a definition essay because it defines the severity of polio and how it is different from small pox and it’s much harder to eradicate.
2. The briefest statement of this essay is that polio may never be eradicated because of how sneaky it is and how many vaccines you need to barely stop it.
3. The biggest difference between polio and small pox is how easy it is to spot small pox and how difficult it can be to tell if someone has polio until its already too late. Polio is sneaky and has no visible signs while its in your body while small pox leaves little skin rashes on your body.
This essay delves into the seriousness of diseases like polio and smallpox. Although it doesn’t offer formal dictionary definitions, it provides a clear understanding of these diseases and emphasizes their significance. The main argument here is that the methods used to eradicate smallpox cannot be directly applied to polio due to fundamental differences between the diseases. Polio, unlike smallpox, cannot be detected until after the infection has occurred, making it challenging to identify and treat affected individuals effectively. This characteristic complicates the eradication efforts as it hampers the ability to provide timely treatment to those with polio.
1. this essay effectively conveys the essence of the term by discussing its consequences and emphasizing the gravity of the associated condition. it delves into potential outcomes and underscores the seriousness of it
2. The most conspicuous point in the thesis is the assertion that smallpox and polio are too dissimilar for strategies to be effective
3. Polio is a disease that remains undetectable until an official diagnosis is made. its presence goes unnoticed until it is officially identified making its eradication more challenging as proactive measures cannot be taken until the disease has been confirmed.
The overall essay is mediocre but lacks definitions of key points. The thesis of this definition is ‘Smallpox and Polio are two variations of the same formula.’ What is the difference between Polio and Smallpox? Polio is a parasite transmitted in feces. When it enters the body, it paralyzes the host and may not be visible for years. On the other hand, smallpox is a contagious disease. It is present in many bumps all over the body, making it easy to detect and finding a cure much easier.