This discussion suffers from several logial principles. firstly, the auther menssioned the immunizations as the only possible and valid way to contain the flu. However, there are other measures like lock down which can contain the diseas more effectively and outright. seconldy, the argument mentioned "a small possibility" in which the inoculation will have a fatal effect on a person, and it does not clear that how much is this "small possibility" in terms of percentage. If it is less than one percent, its is an accepable risk to take in medical viewpoint. Additionally, sometimes colateral damage is of any action can not be avoided, which have to be pa some price for a better good. finally, the writer claim that the inoculation must be done "routinely to all people". This statement has two vague claims. Primally, the routinely doesnot determined how often it sould be administered. The locals may not allow the authorities to do this like every week. Next, there is a herd immunity when over half of a population is vaccinated,. As a result it would be unnecessary to vaccinate all pepole to prevent the spread of the cow flu. In nutsell, this argument could be improved it demistefied the overgenerelized statements, and the auther was more right to the point in his/her statements.