Critical Response of Molloy and Grove’s Article

H1N1 is a swine flu which was outbreak all over the world in 2009 and 2010. Molloy and Grove both discuss the action that government take to solve this crisis, but have very different views about its value. While Grove is positive about the effort that government did, Molloy is highly skeptical. He argues that H1N1 is not as serious as we expect and government has overreacted the consequence of the swine flu. By contrast, Grove is in support of the measures of government to H1N1 although he deems there are some problems with management of the overnment.

Discussion Molloy and Grove offer different perspectives on government’s management. The strength of Grove’s viewpoint is that he illustrates two sides of the event. He points out government’s management is correct and should be improved.

However, Molloy only focuses on the negative side of it. On the other hand, Molloy lists many data to support his argument while Grove just expresses his personal ideas without evidence.

Get quality help now

Doctor Jennifer

Verified writer

Proficient in: Art

5 (893)

“ Thank you so much for accepting my assignment the night before it was due. I look forward to working with you moving forward ”

+84 relevant experts are online

Hire writer

The strength of Grove’s viewpoint is its dialectics. Firstly, he states hat government’s effort is advisable. As he said, ‘In case like this, it is always far better to overprepare than to underprepare. It is a smart statement. Then he points out that there are some problems with the supply of vaccine and puts forward the solution way. The author finds the correct way to solve this problem. However, Grove doesn’t use any evidence to support his ideas, so his article seems subjective.

Although he is a doctor, we don’t know how authoritative he is in this area.

So anyone can object his opinion as long as the person can express some useful counter arguments. Grove’s viewpoints seems a little weak without evidence. By contrast, Molloy lists much evidence in his article. He uses many data to illustrate the situation of H1N1 and people’s life. It lets us know the specific condition of people and government’s management. It is very reliable and it is hard to overturn the author’s viewpoint as they are facts. Perhaps the main weakness in Molloy’s argument is he only talks ne side of the thing. He believes that it is government’s fault to overreact the influence of this disease. However, everything has a paradox. The government has to keep fully alert because no one knows what is the affect of the swine flu. So we should understand the government’s purpose. All in all, H1N1 is a new virus which should be paid attention to. I t is more sensible to government to keep fully alert . than to despise. In this sense, Grove’s concerns are well founded, but perhaps need some evidence.