I think I'm going for a few points here. One is that often toxins are in unexpected places and they last much longer in us and the environment than we often think. For example, just because you avoid teflon at home doesn't mean that any of the restaurants you eat at do. Also, just because you stopped using teflon in the last few years, if you used it or your parents used it prior, then you were accumulating it over the years and it takes a long time to break down in your body. (Note: teflon is an example of the millions of toxins we're exposed to on a daily basis)There seem to be many other studies that link various toxins and pollutants to decreased immune response. If we are experiencing natural decreased immune response then it's probably safe to assume that we're not responding as well to vaccines either, as was shown in the study.
If you vaccinate your child, how do you know that he/she developed an appropriate immune response? You probably don't because we don't check. Maybe this is why we're seeing outbreaks in highly vaccinated communities? Maybe this is why we keep having to add boosters to vaccines that supposedly years ago provided lifetime immunity? Maybe parents should start requesting antibody tests? Would you still vaccinate if they were only 25-50% effective? Would the risk be the same? Would you still vaccinate if we now needed to get boosters every two years for all shots? Do you vaccinate with all that are recommended? If not, why?
The other point I think I was trying to make (probably not effectively) is that I feel like the general population assumes that if it's legal, then it is safe, and we're finding out more and more that it's so much more complicated than that. And I think that's why many of us have a hard time believing things when big business is involved. If history can teach us about the present, it often takes a LONG time for the government to declare that something is unsafe. These conversations about vaccines are the same types of conversations that happened about trans fats. Years ago when I was first learning about the controversy, most people said it was "nutso" thinking that they weren't safe/good for us but the paradigm is shifting, and I think that's happening with vaccines.
Do you believe the government's recommendations over the manufacturers? For example, the manufacturer acknowledges that studies haven't been done in pregnant women so it should only be used if there is a clear need. The CDC recommends all pregnant women get the shot. Would you? What if the manufacturer says that nursing women should avoid it because it hasn't been studied yet your doctor highly recommends that you get it? Who do you believe? What decisions do you make? Why?
By the way, all of these questions are open to all to answer.