This is not the place to lecture on how immunization protects a population.
Let me simplify. No immunization is 100% effective. If you only immunize a portion of the population, There may be enough sucepible people to allow transmission and/or epidemic of the disease.
On average, a good vaccine is at least partially protective in 90% of the population. This level of protection has been shown to be 100% effective in preventing disease based on the mathmatics of propagation. If there are enough unvaccinated individuals, the disease can propagate and cause illness even some of those that are vaccinated.
By not taking the vaccine, you place yourself and others at risk. You have the right to place yourself at risk. The point where law intervenes is where you place others at risk.
I think it is a shame that schools teach students how to put condems on bananas but don’t teach the basics of public health.
By the way, I have no interest in running your life but where your choices put me and mine at risk, I have a right to comment.
I'd not heard of it before (I think it's fairly new) so I had a lot of questions. #1 on the list was "What are the risk factors for transmission?" Dr. said "well (reading from a list)...intravenous drug use. Male-Male sex. Travel to Mexico, China, and other 3rd world countries. Research involving infected primates." There were a few other even more unlikely, scenarios.
As my toddler-age son is not a gay heroin addict, and we're not planning to leave the country anytime soon, I said "no". BUT - if I had just accepted the shot (which, the doc really didn't seem to know too much about) who the heck knows what would have happened.
Granted, the doc said that she thought eventually all kids were going to need a HepA vaccination to attend public school. That's a few years away for us - we'll cross that bridge when we get there. Meanwhile, the drug companies can test their stuff on someone - someone who is afraid to ask questions - else's kid.