According to Dworkin's conception of impure paternalism, protecting the welfare of a particular class of persons involves restricting the freedom of other persons besides those who benefited. He says it is important to see how these cases are different from 'standard' cases of restricting liberty that are justified on non-paternalistic grounds. So, what do you think Dworkin would say about the difference between prohibiting doctors from prescribing anabolic steroids to young people for bodybuilding versus prohibiting pharmaceutical companies from manufacturing vaccines containing harmful additives?