The link below provides some arguments pro and anti vaccine. Even some rebuttals are included. Lots of statistical information is used. In fact, very good points based on statistics are brought up on both sides of the debate. I thought I'd share this as a means to think about the use and challenges of conclusions based on statistics
Vaccines: good or bad? A look into statistical literacy
There's Vaccine Information Statements with details on vaccines, including who shouldn't take them. They won't still be able to guarantee an unknown side effect might occur, kind of like people who don't take vaccines can't guarantee they won't get the disease. But chances of unknown side effects see to be very, very low
there was a post in another thread about some kind of test that can be performed before vaxing, to determine adverse effects that may arise from said given vaccine....i can't remember the name of the test....someone help?
try ssun5 (sorry - I am sure I am butchering the name)
Another idea would be to wait until your child is older (gasp!) where something like asthma, autoimmune issues, and mitochondria might be present. These are things you need to know before you vaccinate, as they might influence your decisions. No one knows if their newborn has mitochondria - but that is when vaccination starts.
Thanks kathymuggle. I still think the link will make for very useful debate about vaccines in general, we don't have to talk about mandatory vaccination. Actually, the 'bioethicist thread' has much more inclinations about mandatory vaccines than this statistical literacy link does.
Basically, I like the link but I disagree with the implication of the title of the paper. When doing a debate about statistics one argues about the usefulness about vaccines. Being mandatory is more a debate about law and other topics, statistics often takes a back seat.