I would disagree about the risks r/t vaccines versus not immunizing. Where are my children who live in rural PA going to get exposure to diptheria, for example? The most likely acutal disease one could get would be pertussis. THAT, however, is the part of the DPT vaccine most likely to kill or hurt children (very much proven). That is why Big Pharma has recently added an attenatued version (DPaT) for those people who prefer killed, rather than live, toxins injected into their children.
As to causality, I could say the same thing about the other position (yours evidently). The close time relationship between certain injuries and vaccinations have been shrugged off as "coincidence."
I am glad I am still free to choose NOT to put those potentially damaging substances into my children's bodies.
As to your position, why not err on the side of caution and at least develop screening for children who could potentially have debiliating or fatal reactions to the toxins in vaccines? Would that hurt the drug companies too much? It would, becaue it would admit that there is a problem (there already is a government agency for children who have been injured or killed by vaccines, mentioned int he previous post. Obviously the Feds do not see it as merely coincidence.)
BTW, at one time, leeches were thought to be a great cure for all kinds of ailments.
And, rural or not, unless your kids never come into contact with anyone, they are at risk if they are unvaccinated.
And your leech example is ridiculous. The past thirty years has seen a refinement in scientific studies so we can discard the bogus. Back then, it was voodoo and alchemy, not medicine as we know it today.
I truly hope you are never made to feel sorry about witholding vaccinations from your kids.
And just to let you know, I tried to withold the hepatitis B vaccination from my kids, but failed--they would not let them into school. There is NO REASON ON EARTH to vaccinate kids against that disease.
Reason rather than emotion.