– If your child brings a disease into the school system that is easily treatable with a vaccine that is available, then they should not be allowed to be admitted to public school, just like someone who has Ebola is put into quarantine if they enter the U.S. Viral outbreaks that can be prevented are a great tragedy. If you choose to put the public at risk, then you should not be in the public forum in any capacity.
– You also choose to wear a seat belt in a car, and you’re sure happy when that accident comes and you’re safer because of it. We won’t have a seatbelt when a viral pandemic starts taking lives and we let it happen.

4. This article is very condescending to those who question vaccine safety and decline certain vaccines. I don’t think I’m the only one who would interpret your tone as implying that people should vaccinate their children despite safety concerns.

– In no way is it meant to be condescending. Here is what I think:

Where we get into trouble is when there are feelings involved. It’s what makes us human. Things get dicey when we start using emotionally charged social presumptions when trying to dissect a purely biological argument. That mixing of disciplines really distorts fact from fiction, and here we are with the vaccine situation. Scientific facts versus sociological emotions. We can’t hope to have anything substantive coming from an emotional conversation about biological data.

5. The data you linked to has nothing to do with the study I’m asking for (besides, I could go on and on about that data you presented, but I think that’s not the topic of this article). Why is the government averse to funding a study looking at, say, autism rates of vaccinated populations vs the unvaccinated? When government officials are asked this, they come right out and say that they think those funds are better spent elsewhere. Watch “The Greater Good” and you’ll hear it for yourself.

-The data I linked is from the Center for Disease Control and clearly shows that after vaccines have been introduced, those diseases have been nearly eliminated.

Studies showing no link between vaccines and the mentioned topics:
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0140673699012398

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264410X01000974

6. I guess we can agree to disagree on whether the injection of toxic substances, such as thimerosal (mercury) and formaldehyde into the body is invasive. Your other point about holding the unvaccinated accountable for other people’s illnesses is off topic, but I’d be glad to go there with you, if you’d like. Perhaps in another post.

– If you scroll to 2001, you can read that this has been removed from vaccines despite no evidence of harm in 2001. Full report is available as well.

http://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/concerns/thimerosal/thimerosal_timeline.html

4. This article is very condescending to those who question vaccine safety and decline certain vaccines. I don’t think I’m the only one who would interpret your tone as implying that people should vaccinate their children despite safety concerns.

5. The data you linked to has nothing to do with the study I’m asking for (besides, I could go on and on about that data you presented, but I think that’s not the topic of this article). Why is the government averse to funding a study looking at, say, autism rates of vaccinated populations vs the unvaccinated? When government officials are asked this, they come right out and say that they think those funds are better spent elsewhere. Watch “The Greater Good” and you’ll hear it for yourself.

6. I guess we can agree to disagree on whether the injection of toxic substances, such as thimerosal (mercury) and formaldehyde into the body is invasive. Your other point about holding the unvaccinated accountable for other people’s illnesses is off topic, but I’d be glad to go there with you, if you’d like. Perhaps in another post.