DOCSLIB.ORG

Validating Vaccines: Understanding the Rhetorical Dynamics Of

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Validating Vaccines: Understanding the Rhetorical Dynamics Of Validating Vaccines: Understanding the Rhetorical Dynamics of Expertise Amid a Manufactured Controversy Lauren R. Archer A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy University of Washington 2014 Reading Committee: Leah Ceccarelli, Chair Christine Harold LeiLani Nishime Program Authorized to Offer Degree: Department of Communication ©Copyright 2014 Lauren R. Archer University of Washington Abstract Validating Vaccines: Understanding the Rhetorical Dynamics of Expertise Amid a Manufactured Controversy Lauren R. Archer Chair of the Supervisory Committee: Professor Leah Ceccarelli Department of Communication This dissertation examined the rhetorical dynamics of expertise around a manufactured science- based controversy. Exploring the rhetorical creation and evolution of various claims to expertise across different discursive contexts illuminates why (and in what situations) the rhetoric of expertise persuades or fails to persuade. Using the ongoing debate surrounding vaccine-induced autism as a case study, this work explored the persuasive means used by voices competing for recognition as an expert on a contested issue with technical elements. This study focused most closely on two key figures within AVC discourse: Andrew Wakefield and Jenny McCarthy. While the involvement of these two personalities in the AVC occurred on separate continents and transpired almost a decade apart, they sparked key moments in the life of this science-based manufactured controversy. In order to offer new insight into these key moments, this dissertation employed a textual-intertextual approach to rhetorically analyze key discursive moments in the evolution of this controversy while also examining reception among audiences to understand how discourses of expertise influence decision making around an issue portrayed as uncertain. This analysis revealed that the clarity of expert language practices used in technical settings becomes obscured in public contexts, introducing ambiguity that allows for reported research to be interpreted as more certain than it is and creating discursive openings for manufacturing scientific controversy. It also uncovered the rhetorical power of style and appeals to ethos as substitutes for credentials or specialized knowledge when enacting expertise for non- specialist audiences who rely on judgments of trustworthiness rather than assessments of epistemic accuracy in determining which experts to believe and whose advice to follow. Examination of parental discourses regarding vaccines illustrated that vaccine decisions derive from complex risk assessments that consider the diseases being vaccinated against, the public health threats in an individual’s local environment, and the perceived vulnerability of one’s child as means for gauging whether the risks posed by vaccines outweigh the risks of not vaccinating. Additionally, a careful rhetorical analysis of maternal discourses about vaccines revealed that while mothers explicitly deny believing in vaccine-induced autism, language choices and expressions reveal that an underlying sense of doubt about the issue remains. Current public discourses that portray vaccines as chemical concoctions that operate aggressively to elicit an immune system response help heighten concerns about vaccine risks. Framing vaccines as medical aids that help protect vulnerable children and localizing public health messages to highlight the risks for a particular community offer promise for addressing vaccine hesitant attitudes in meaningful ways. Additionally, medical experts must become rhetorically savvy and recognize the opportunities and constraints presented by their rhetorical situation. Moving beyond supplying more information to dialoging with parents about the risks involved creates opportunities for building trust between practitioners and patients and encouraging acceptance of expert advice. Ultimately this dissertation argued that while the debates surrounding manufactured, science-based controversies seem to center on whether or not people believe the science, such issues are actually about which experts people trust. Such an understanding should reframe rejection of expert communication not as a matter of audience ignorance but as a failure in persuasion. Recognition of this should shift responses away from debates that can too easily become entrenched in issues of highly technical obscurities or demarcation of various forms of expertise that bear little meaning or influence on non-specialist audiences and instead focus on rhetorical opportunities for building ethos and communicating common ground. Acknowledgements Although this dissertation bears only the name of one author, many others had a hand in helping to shape it and support its development and eventual completion. First and foremost, I am deeply indebted to my chair, Leah Ceccarelli, whose generosity in providing sage advice, astute insights, and eagle-eye readings not only made this project better, but also helped me become a significantly better scholar than I would be otherwise. To my committee—Christine Harold, LeiLani Nishime, and Bruce Hevly—thank you for all the kind words, helpful reading suggestions, and provocative questions you asked; every time I had the pleasure of conversing with you about my work, I walked away the benefactor. I would like to express my gratitude to Communication Librarian Jessica Albano for her help in tracking down artifacts and other important resources in the early stages of this project. Additionally, the Department of Communication offered support for the development of this dissertation in many ways, including the Laura Crowell Fund for graduate and student research and travel and the Daniel and Margaret Carper Dissertation Award. To the mothers who shared with me their time (a very limited resource!) and their perspectives, thank you for helping me develop a deeper appreciation for the subtle complexities of the vaccine issue. Thanks as well to the many amazing colleagues who offered encouragement, support, and links to any story about Jenny McCarthy along the way. A few deserve to be mentioned by name. I am endlessly grateful to Lindsey Djordjevich, for our weekly lunches, which helped me save money on a therapist and get to this point with my sanity still intact. I am also thankful for Jen Malkowski, Meara Faw, and Sheetal Agarwal, who never tired of talking with me about the autism-vaccine issue; these conversations helped me tremendously in making sense of this issue in order to make progress on the dissertation. To my family, words cannot capture how much gratitude I have for your love, support, encouragement, and endless faith in me. Your unquestioning confidence in my success helped me persevere during moments of doubt and exhaustion. Thanks especially to my parents for reassuring me that it was okay to “still” be in school and for making it possible for me to continue pursuing this goal. Finally, I would like to thank my husband, Brian, who has been through all the ups and downs of this journey with me and married me anyway! Your own passion, dedication, and work ethic inspired me to continually keep working toward my dream. Thank you for all your support in making this project come to fruition, from always keeping an eye out for any story related to vaccines to letting me talk endlessly about expertise to having patience with me and taking on all the household chores when I only had time to write and sleep. I could not have completed this dissertation without you, so this achievement is as much yours as it is mine. TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter 1 ................................................................................................................................... 1 Introduction: Enacting Expertise Chapter 2 ................................................................................................................................. 33 Hidden in a Hedge: The Harms of Expert Language Practices in Scientific Discourse Chapter 3 ................................................................................................................................. 74 Accommodating Expertise: The Disappearance of Hedges and Demarcations in Reception of Wakefield’s Research Chapter 4 ............................................................................................................................... 103 Mommy Instinct: Parenthood as Expertise Chapter 5 ............................................................................................................................... 149 Perceptions of a Playboy Bunny: Responding to McCarthy’s Enactments of Expertise Chapter 6 ............................................................................................................................... 168 Parental Choice: Assessing Experts and Making Vaccination Decisions Chapter 7 ............................................................................................................................... 208 Lessons Learned: Unweaving the Rhetorical Dynamics of Expertise Amid Controversy Bibliography ........................................................................................................................... 227 Appendix A: Interview Respondents ...................................................................................... 244 Appendix B: Interview Questions Guide ................................................................................ 245 i Chapter 1 Introduction: Enacting
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Values, Justifications, and Perspectives Connected to the Anti-Vaccination Movement Gigi Garzio [email protected]
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Sound Ideas University of Puget Sound Sound Ideas Summer Research Summer 2018 Values, Justifications, and Perspectives Connected to the Anti-Vaccination Movement Gigi Garzio [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://soundideas.pugetsound.edu/summer_research Part of the Anthropology Commons, and the Medicine and Health Commons Recommended Citation Garzio, Gigi, "Values, Justifications, and Perspectives Connected to the Anti-Vaccination Movement" (2018). Summer Research. 309. https://soundideas.pugetsound.edu/summer_research/309 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Sound Ideas. It has been accepted for inclusion in Summer Research by an authorized administrator of Sound Ideas. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Introduction Throughout the 18th and 19th centuries, when the first smallpox outbreak began and the first vaccine was introduced, there has been vaccine skepticism (Offit, 2015). Smallpox outbreaks, and the fatalities that come with it, continued to spread around the world despite the development of the vaccine. However, between the 1940s and the early 1970s, anti-vaccine sentiment declined due to “three trends: a boom in vaccine science, discovery, and manufacture; public awareness of widespread outbreaks of infectious diseases (measles, mumps, rubella, pertussis, polio, and others) and the desire to protect children from these highly prevalent ills; and a baby boom, accompanied by increasing levels of education and wealth” (Poland et al, 2011). These factors led to general public acceptance of vaccines, which resulted in significant decreases in disease outbreaks. However, with less visible outbreaks of disease and more vaccines being added to the childhood vaccination schedule, the presence of the anti-vaccination movement returned in the 1970s (Wolfe, 2002).
    [Show full text]
  • Adverse Effects of Vaccines: Evidence and Causality
    REPORT BRIEF AUGUST 2011 .For more information visit www.iom.edu/vaccineadverseeffects Adverse Effects of Vaccines Evidence and Causality Immunizations are a cornerstone of the nation’s efforts to protect people from a host of infectious diseases. As required by the Food and Drug Admin- istration, vaccines are tested for safety before they enter the market, and their performance is continually evaluated to identify any risks that might appear over time. Vaccines are not free from side effects, or “adverse effects,” but most are very rare or very mild. Importantly, some adverse health problems following a vaccine may be due to coincidence and are not caused by the vaccine. As part of the evaluation of vaccines over time, researchers assess evidence to deter- As part of the evaluation of mine if adverse events following vaccination are causally linked to a specific vaccines over time, researchers vaccine, and if so, they are referred to as adverse effects. Under the National assess evidence to determine if Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Congress established the National Vac- adverse events following cine Injury Compensation Program (VICP) to provide compensation to peo- vaccination are causally linked to ple injured by vaccines. Anyone who thinks they or a family member—often a a specific vaccine, and if so, they are referred to as adverse effects. child—has been injured can file a claim. The Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA), the agency within the Department of Health and Human Services that administers VICP, can use evidence that demonstrates a causal link between an adverse event and a vaccine to streamline the claim process.
    [Show full text]
  • Vaccines and Autism: What You Should Know | Vaccine Education
    Q A Vaccines and Autism: What you should know Volume& 1 Summer 2008 Some parents of children with autism are concerned that vaccines are the cause. Their concerns center on three areas: the combination measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine; thimerosal, a mercury-containing preservative previously contained in several vaccines; and the notion that babies receive too many vaccines too soon. Q. What are the symptoms of autism? Q. Does the MMR vaccine cause autism? A. Symptoms of autism, which typically appear during the A. No. In 1998, a British researcher named Andrew Wakefi eld fi rst few years of life, include diffi culties with behavior, social raised the notion that the MMR vaccine might cause autism. skills and communication. Specifi cally, children with autism In the medical journal The Lancet, he reported the stories of may have diffi culty interacting socially with parents, siblings eight children who developed autism and intestinal problems and other people; have diffi culty with transitions and need soon after receiving the MMR vaccine. To determine whether routine; engage in repetitive behaviors such as hand fl apping Wakefi eld’s suspicion was correct, researchers performed or rocking; display a preoccupation with activities or toys; a series of studies comparing hundreds of thousands of and suffer a heightened sensitivity to noise and sounds. children who had received the MMR vaccine with hundreds Autism spectrum disorders vary in the type and severity of of thousands who had never received the vaccine. They found the symptoms they cause, so two children with autism may that the risk of autism was the same in both groups.
    [Show full text]
  • Download Download
    “Can We Get a Cleanup On Aisle 2?” Previous: The Antisocial Fantasies of Jude the Obscure by Matthew Risling “Can We Get a Cleanup On Aisle 2?”: How Film Critics Mopped Up the Transgressions of Jenny McCarthy’s Dirty Love Sara Swain Pivot is published through Open Journal Systems (OJS) at York University 2 Introduction Dirty Love (John Asher, 2005) is the consequence of Jenny McCarthy’s fearless foray into the risky territory of the gross-out comedy. The film endured a long and laborious gestation period under the threat of financial ruin. The project began as a sitcom pilot that McCarthy had initially penned for Fox Television. Fox passed, deeming the project “too edgy and too controversial for TV” “Can We Get a Cleanup On (qtd. in Kevin Aisle 2?”: Williamson). But McCarthy and her How Film Critics Mopped Up the production team could Transgressions of Jenny McCarthy’s not be dissuaded. They Dirty Love bought the rights back Sara Swain from Fox and McCarthy went to work transforming the script into a feature film (Kates). She insists that she never wanted to be a writer but because of the dearth of onscreen comedic roles for women, she was forced to take matters into her own hands (qtd. in Sobczynski). Dirty Love eventually debuted at the Sundance Film Festival in late January 2005, where it was warmly received. John Cooper, the Festival’s Programming Director, lauded the filmmakers in the program notes for so brazenly travelling “across a comic minefield where few dare to tread.” Soon after the film was picked up for distribution.
    [Show full text]
  • Science Reporting Syllabus: Covering the Environment, Technology and Medicine
    1 Science reporting syllabus: Covering the environment, technology and medicine Science reporting is in a moment of extreme transition: Popular science writing is experiencing a renaissance at precisely the moment that traditional media outlets are jettisoning specialized reporters. This creates tremendous opportunity and tremendous challenges. This course makes sure students are prepared to meet those challenges. Course objective This course is designed to acquaint reporters with all aspects of science reporting and writing. It will train participants to view new breakthroughs and discoveries with skepticism and will give students a working knowledge of many of the main areas of science coverage, including the environment, artificial intelligence, and human interaction with technology. There will be lessons on social media, online writing, news and feature writing, and writing long-form narratives. Learning objectives The syllabus is designed to strengthen students’ core competencies in several areas: Determining what sources and outlets can be trusted to discuss controversial or unproven claims. Learning which questions will elicit meaningful responses. Understanding that choosing not to cover a story can be just as important an editorial decision as deciding how to cover it. Evaluating what type of form a journalist is most comfortable with and seeking out ways to work in that form. Course design This course will focus on developing toolkits for evaluating science stories in addition to learning about some specific issues or controversies. It is designed as a workshop course for between 10 and 15 students. An integral part of the course is analyzing and critiquing other students’ work. Readings Required books Deborah Blum, Mary Knudson and Robin Marantz Henig, editors, A Field Guide for Science Writers, 2005.
    [Show full text]
  • My Open Letter to Jenny Mccarthy Russ Davis
    my open letter to jenny mCcarthy Russ davis From: Russ Davis, student/writer; Puyallup, Washington To: Jenny McCarthy, model/comedienne/actress/author/activist; Weehawken, New Jersey Subject: Why I Oppose You and Your Activism Dear Ms. McCarthy, Before all else, let me tell you exactly who I am. My name is Russ Davis, and I am an autistic. On the spectrum. Whatever you want to call it. In June 2000, I was diagnosed with Asperger’s Syn- drome; I’m now made to understand that’s not a thing anymore. No matter. I still tell people that I have Asperger’s, but my concern is not over what label my fellow autistics choose to use. My concern is that autistics keep in mind that we should not be enemies with each other–––we should be enemies with people who want to destroy who we are. Last night, I had the strangest dream. I dreamt that I final- ly had a chance to meet you in person and tell you everything I’ve always wanted to tell you. Because, for all the statements you’ve given on autism, I don’t think you’ve ever been willing to sit down with an actual autistic person to see how we really feel (except for your son, but the public doesn’t get to hear his side of the story). Well, last night, your dream self granted me that opportunity. Let me tell you right now what I told her last night. I am a human being with dreams. I want to be a published author.
    [Show full text]
  • Plain Talk About Childhood Immunization
    PLAIN TALK ABOUT CHILDHOOD IMMUNIZATION This 2018 edition was developed and edited by the following public and private organizations: Washington State Department of Health Immunization Action Coalition of Washington (WithinReach) Public Health – Seattle & King County Snohomish Health District Spokane Regional Health District This publication was made possible, in part, by cooperative agreement #IP000762 from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. For persons with disabilities, this document is available on request in other formats. To submit a request, please call 1-800-525-0127 (TDD/TTY call 711). A MESSAGE TO PARENTS Dear Parents: Thank you for your interest in learning more about immunizations. As parents, we make important decisions that affect our children. Immunizing your child is one of these decisions. We all want to make good choices and do what’s best for our children. As a community, we must protect our own health and work together to protect each other’s health. Choosing to immunize is one of the most important decisions you can make to protect yourself, your children, your family, and the community from diseases that vaccines prevent. These diseases still occur in our communities. In 2012, Washington State had an epidemic of whooping cough, with more cases than we’ve had since the 1940s. Washington also had a mumps outbreak in 2016-2017 and measles outbreaks in 2008, 2014, and 2015, including one death in 2015. We want parents to make informed health decisions based on accurate information. There is an overwhelming amount of vaccine-related material out there and we know that parents, healthcare professionals, school nurses, child care providers, and others want information that is accurate, trustworthy, and clear.
    [Show full text]
  • Hearing Before the Committee on Government Reform
    DOCUMENT RESUME ED 466 915 EC 309 063 TITLE Autism: Present Challenges, Future Needs--Why the Increased Rates? Hearing before the Committee on Government Reform. House of Representatives, One Hundred Sixth Congress, Second Session (April 6,2000). INSTITUTION Congress of the U.S., Washington, DC. House Committee on Government Reform. REPORT NO House-Hrg-106-180 PUB DATE 2001-00-00 NOTE 483p. AVAILABLE FROM Government Printing Office, Superintendent of Documents, Congressional Sales Office, Washington, DC 20402-9328. Tel: 202-512-1800. For full text: http://www.house.gov/reform. PUB TYPE Legal/Legislative/Regulatory Materials (090) EDRS PRICE EDRS Price MF02/PC20 Plus Postage. DESCRIPTORS *Autism; *Child Health; Children; *Disease Control; *Etiology; Family Problems; Hearings; *Immunization Programs; Incidence; Influences; Parent Attitudes; *Preventive Medicine; Research Needs; Symptoms (Individual Disorders) IDENTIFIERS Congress 106th; Vaccination ABSTRACT This document contains the proceedings of a hearing on April 6, 2000, before the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Government Reform. The hearing addressed the increasing rate of children diagnosed with autism, possible links between autism and childhood vaccinations, and future needs of these children. After opening statements by congressmen on the Committee, the statements and testimony of Kenneth Curtis, James Smythe, Shelley Reynolds, Jeana Smith, Scott Bono, and Dr. Wayne M. Danker, all parents of children with autism, are included. Their statements discuss symptoms of autism, vaccination concerns, family problems, financial concerns, and how parents can be helped. The statements and testimony of the second panel are then provided, including that of Andrew Wakefield, John O'Leary, Vijendra K. Singh, Coleen A. Boyle, Ben Schwartz, Paul A.
    [Show full text]
  • Sam Urdank, Resume JULY
    SAM URDANK Photographer 310- 877- 8319 www.samurdank.com BAD WORDS DIRECTOR: Jason Bateman CAST: Jason Bateman, Kathryn Hahn, Rohan Chand, Philip Baker Hall INDEPENDENT FILM Allison Janney, Ben Falcone, Steve Witting COFFEE TOWN DIRECTOR: Brad Campbell INDEPENDENT FILM CAST: Glenn Howerton, Steve Little, Ben Schwartz, Josh Groban Adrianne Palicki TAKEN 2 DIRECTOR: Olivier Megato TWENTIETH CENTURY FOX (L.A. 1st Unit) CAST: Liam Neeson, Maggie Grace,,Famke Janssen, THE APPARITION DIRECTOR: Todd Lincoln WARNER BRO. PICTURES (L.A. 1st Unit) CAST: Ashley Greene, Sebastian Stan, Tom Felton SYMPATHY FOR DELICIOUS DIRECTOR: Mark Ruffalo CORNER STORE ENTERTAINMENT CAST: Christopher Thornton, Mark Ruffalo, Juliette Lewis, Laura Linney, Orlando Bloom, Noah Emmerich, James Karen, John Caroll Lynch EXTRACT DIRECTOR: Mike Judge MIRAMAX FILMS CAST: Jason Bateman, Mila Kunis, Kristen Wiig, Ben Affleck, JK Simmons, Clifton Curtis THE INVENTION OF LYING DIRECTOR: Ricky Gervais & Matt Robinson WARNER BROS. PICTURES CAST: Ricky Gervais, Jennifer Garner, Rob Lowe, Lewis C.K., Tina Fey, Jeffrey Tambor Jonah Hill, Jason Batemann, Philip Seymore Hoffman, Edward Norton ROLE MODELS DIRECTOR: David Wain UNIVERSAL PICTURES CAST: Seann William Scott, Paul Rudd, Jane Lynch, Christopher Mintz-Plasse Bobb’e J. Thompson, Elizabeth Banks WITLESS PROTECTION DIRECTOR: Charles Robert Carner LIONSGATE CAST: Larry the Cable Guy, Ivana Milicevic, Yaphet Kotto, Peter Stomare, Jenny McCarthy, Joe Montegna, Eric Roberts DAYS OF WRATH DIRECTOR: Celia Fox FOXY FILMS/INDEPENDENT
    [Show full text]
  • (No Jab, No Pay) Bill 2015 Submission
    16 October, 2015 The Committee Secretary Senate Standing Committees on Community Affairs PO Box 6100 Parliament House CANBERRA ACT 2600 Dear Committee Secretary, Re: Submission to the Senate Community Affairs Legislation Committee Inquiry into the Social Services Legislation Amendment (No Jab, No Pay) Bill 2015 I am a Solicitor who has practiced in areas of law that have pertained to the issue of vaccination. Consequently, having conversed with professionals in various scientific and medical fields of practice on this issue and prepared matters for hearing based on their expertise, I make the following submission to emphasize the extent that the proposed legislation breaches fundamental human rights and the government’s responsibilities to it’s families and children. According to the Social Services Legislation Amendment (No jab, No pay) Bill 2015 Explanatory Memorandum and Statement of Compatibility with Human Rights: “This Bill will introduce a 2015 Budget measure relevant to families. This Bill amends the immunisation requirements for child care benefit, child care rebate and the family tax benefit Part A supplement. The changes will tighten the existing immunisation requirements for these payments, reinforcing the importance of immunisation and protecting public health, especially for children. From 1 January 2016, this measure makes these payments conditional on meeting the childhood immunisation requirements for children at all ages. Exemptions will only apply for valid medical reasons, or if the Secretary has determined in writing that a child meets the immunisation requirements. The Secretary will be able to determine that a child meets the immunisation requirements after considering any decision-making principles set out in a legislative instrument made by the Minister.
    [Show full text]
  • The National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program: Awareness, Perception, and Communication Considerations
    The National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program: Awareness, Perception, and Communication Considerations Developing a Comprehensive National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program Research Report Presented by Banyan Communications and Altarum Institute For the U.S. Health Resources and Services Administration Division of Vaccine Injury Compensation June 2010 Table of Contents 1. Introduction and Background ................................................................................................................. 1 a. VICP BACKGROUND: RELATED LEGISLATION ................................................................................................. 2 2. Review of the VICP Literature ................................................................................................................. 4 a. METHODOLOGY ............................................................................................................................................. 4 b. VICP PERCEPTION AND REACTION ................................................................................................................ 4 c. VICP MESSAGING AND PROMOTION ............................................................................................................. 7 3. Scan of the Field: VICP Players, Media, and the Online Environment .................................................... 12 a. METHODOLOGY ............................................................................................................................................. 12 b. VICP AND
    [Show full text]
  • Biotechnology and Consumer Decision-Making
    SAX (DO NOT DELETE) 2/16/2017 2:44 PM Biotechnology and Consumer Decision-Making Joanna K. Sax* ABSTRACT Society is facing major challenges in climate change, health care and overall quality of life. Scientific advances to address these areas continue to grow, with overwhelming evidence that the application of highly tested forms of biotechnology is safe and effective. Despite scientific consensus in these areas, consumers appear reluctant to support their use. Research that helps to understand consumer decision-making and the public’s resistance to biotechnologies such as vaccines, fluoridated water programs and genetically engineered food, will provide great social value. This article is forward-thinking in that it suggests that important research in behavioral decision-making, specifically affect and ambiguity, can be used to help consumers make informed choices about major applications of biotechnology. This article highlights some of the most controversial examples: vaccinations, genetically engineered food, rbST treated dairy cows, fluoridated water, and embryonic stem cell research. In many of these areas, consumers perceive the risks as high, but the experts calculate the risks as low. Four major thematic approaches are proposed to create a roadmap for policymakers to consider for policy design and implementation in controversial areas of biotechnology. This article articulates future directions for studies that implement decision-making research to allow consumers to appropriately assign risk to their options and make informed decisions. * Visiting Faculty Member, James E. Rogers College of Law – University of Arizona (Fall 2016); Professor of Law, California Western School of Law; J.D., University of Pennsylvania Law School; Ph.D., University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine.
    [Show full text]