I can't even find Wakefield paper to contrast and compare it with the refutations. They removed his paper and there's no archive of it sigh

Nvm here it is https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(97)11096-0/fulltext

It is said is retracted?

And published in 1998

Well, I’m not a doc

I have to go now bye

''scientific misrepresentation (they reported that their sampling was consecutive when, in fact, it was selective). This retraction was published as a small, anonymous paragraph in the journal, on behalf of the editors.[8]'' All the children had the same conditions according to Wakefield so the selective part is false. '' 12 children (mean age 6 years [range 3–10], 11 boys) were referred to a paediatric gastroenterology unit with a history of normal development followed by loss of acquired skills, including language, together with diarrhoea and abdominal pain.'' What I do agree is that the sample size is too small but I doubt they would ever let an independent doctor lead his anti-vaxx study on a fair sample size.

'' One child (child four) had received monovalent measles vaccine at 15 months, after which his development slowed (confirmed by professional assessors). No association was made with the vaccine at this time. He received a dose of measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine at age 4·5 years, the day after which his mother described a striking deterioration in his behaviour that she did link with the immunisation. Child nine received measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine at 16 months. At 18 months he developed recurrent antibioticresistant otitis media and the first behavioural symptoms, including disinterest in his sibling and lack of play. '' I don't see any refutations of this in the refuting paper against Wakefield

Well, I mean, even if there was a minimum risk of that, I would prefer not to die from a curable illness.

That won't happen for 80% of the population with a normal immune system, I do agree for vaccination with people who have weak immune systems.

Forced vaccinations violate human rights

Yeah, many schools have forced vaccinations with no parenting consent. '' If you don't vaccinate your kid we will kick him out '' is also unlawful

The problem is that viruses mutation hit even the vaccinated people so if you, for example, don’t vaccinate and you have this virus you can infect other people because the virus mutates in your body

Because the vaccine is for one antigen

But if virus mutates the antigen changes

Thats one another excuse

That is not an excuse

Well bs excuse

This is how viruses works

Oh yes

The antigen makes your immune system accustom to them thus making it weaker. You will always need a new vaccine since your body has never learned to fight that specific virus and now it has become stronger, they put you on a hook.

Just change how they work in order to sell more lies about vaccines

No, the antigen is a biomolecule

Even your immune system produces that

All they do is inject it in your body

So that you don’t have to produce it yourself

What happens when the virus becomes stronger and stronger than the antigen? You will need another vaccine since your body has never learned to produce itself antigens against that virus.

You don’t need a new vaccine if all people are vaccinated, because viruses don’t mutate. Virus don’t become stronger, virus are different than bacteria

Lolol

Bacteria can become resistant

To antibiotics

That work differently that vaccines

One second again you said viruses mutate

And now

Viruses don’t mutate if all people are vaccinated

Because they can’t enter a body and mutate within it

Viruses need to enter a body to mutate

“You don’t need a new vaccine if all people are vaccinated, because viruses don’t mutate.”

Yes, it was referred to the sentence before

If people are vaccinated, viruses don’t mutate

Either your english is bad or you clearly meant you dont need a new vaccine when everyone’s vaccinated BECAUSE viruses dont mutate