How do you come back at this one?

[strmis]

So I've found myself in a big vaccine debate so how would you respond?

What are some of the most compelling arguments you have against NOT vaccinating your infant ??

besides toxins, my whole thing is we dont know the long term repercussions of vaccines.  The physiological mechanism of its introduction to the body is COMPLETELY unnatural, but how can you "cite" peer reviewed journals on that? who would even have the money to fund such a study?

Are there any peer reviewed studies on the efficacy of vaccines?

He even goes on to say:

"The Wakefield study is the only one I know of, but it has been discredited, and Wakefield lost is license to proactive medicine. By the way, Wakefield held a PhD in medicine. Appeals to authority do not make strong arguments. It's better to rely on the body of evidence available."

I don't even know how to come back to something like that. Was it "discredited" and by who? I figure, you can almost discredit anything if you put the right spin on it, but can anyone back up that study with other sources??

[yarngoddess]

Honestly I don't debate. I did in the beginning of our vax journey, of course it was easier because my son was damaged by a vax :(  However I've come to the conclusion that arguing my belief or opinion, particularly on vaccination, was a no win situation. The pro-vax people (in my experience, and IMHO) refuse to listen to my opinion and nothing I say will ever be good enough to them.  

I'm sorry you've been put in the position to have to argue your point- or feel that you have to PROVE that you are making an educated decision for your child. 

[Emmeline II]

"Vaccinations, like any other drugs, can have negative consequences--it is my right as a parent to make medical decisions for my child and decide what drugs, if any, are administered."

Wakefield wasn't in the news yet when I decided not to vaccinate, though whatever else you label it, vaccinations can cause brain injury.

Beyond conformity has some advice on how to search journals for useful articles

Hilary's Desk

[Marnica]

Obviously your friend knows nothing about Wakefield. He was a renouned surgeon - an MD not a PhD. As for the Wakefield case itself - the entire hsitory of the case study, the GMC trial and yes the alleged fraud that he committed is far to complex to get into here IMO. I can only tell you what I think having followed the case for quite some time. I think the man has had his entire life screwed by people who have far more money and power than he does. He was made an example of so that others like him (medical professionals) will not speak out. And yet despite this - he fights on to defend himself and the children.

I agree about not debating. Its nobody's business why I choose to do what I do. The only people I will discuss it with are people that are truly interested in my reasons and are open minded about it. You can usually tell who those people are as soon as they open their mouth.