That. . .seems only to be, apparently; a matter of opinion or knowledge of fact. My daughter's Pediatrcian said - do not do 'flu' vaccines on her children (duh. . .) to young and because they are STILL using mercury in the shots that they were 'hyping'. Or maybe these are 'older' batches (?) Other Pediatricians simply do not go 'there'. I have also read, repeatedly. . .that while mercury is no longer used in a number of 'shots'; it has yet to be altogether abandoned.
So 'who to believe?' I don't know; but think it is all too easy for Doctors to be more than cavalier; as they consder what they think may be a 'greater good'. . .versus, alowing the Parents to weigh their options - so as to consider the probabilities of negative cause and effect.
From what I have read - and perhaps again a 'who knows' - that many (all?) flu shots etc. still are mercury based.
We can only wonder why 'autism' is on the rise. . .the stats here can no longer be excused as our simply being more aware; and the same applies for Alzheimers. That vaccines can 'never' be tainted. . .impure or just a 'bad batch'; and that those who receive them; are physically equal is unrealistic.
Much to think about; as seeking immediate protection may mean, more opportunity for future degenerative issues - whether it be child related. . .or the degenerative issues of aging adults.
And of course, not all body/physical constituions the same. What might prove quite damaging to one; may not impact another; but to ignore the possibilities and the respect of permitting one to weigh in truthfully on the matter; is medically inexcusable.
Immunizations, and all medications and medical treatments for that matter, involve risks as well as benefits and we can never be sure when we have to make the decision for ourselves or our children that we know all of these tradeoffs. I remember standing in line for the sugar cube polio vaccine in the 1950's and now it has been proven that that vaccine was tainted with a monkey virus from the monkey tissue it was grown on. That monkey virus has now been implicated in the rise of a certain kind of brain cancer in children and it is thought that mothers can pass this virus on to their children during pregnancy.
If you don't believe this then go to the Atlantic magazine website and search for articles on polio. This article details the entire story including how much obstructionism and disdain the Italian researcher had to endure from the US medical establishment. He eventually found a vial of the old vaccine in a GP's office and was able to prove the existance of the monkey virus.
The point of my comments is not to encourage people not to get vaccines, I have had my own children vaccinated (MMR, DPT and menningitus for a college age child), but to warn that we will never be able to know all the potential risks. To believe that medical science understands the human immune system and its interaction with the environment sufficiently to provide all the answers about the risks and benefits of vaccines is to exhibit supreme human arrogance. Given the real threat of polio in the 50's, I do not blame my parents for giving me the vaccine. I do blame the medical/public health industry in this country for trying to thwart research and intimidate individuals who are doing research on possible risks of immunizations.
What would my parents have done if they knew then the vaccine was tainted with a monkey virus? Probably the same thing because polio was a clear and present danger at that time and the risks of the monkey virus was an unknown future possibility. We can never be sure that what we are being told by medical authorities about immunizations is the full and complete truth and to be honest they can not know this themselves. We have to make decisions, including public policy decisions, within this area of doubt and of unknown possible harm and for me this implies the least coercive policy on mandating immunizations and maximum freedom for individual choice is called for.
I'm sure you've heard of "crazy checks" - SSI moneys received by enterprising parents who have had their children diagnosed with some mental disorder or other. It's a strong incentive to exaggeration or even outright fraud.
Some friends of mine have a child who suffers from what used to be called autism. There is no mistaking it, and those children are, thankfully, still rare. But autism and Asperger's and autism spectrum disorder are diagnosed now in what used to be considered kids who were just a little odd. My entire family, which consists largely of rather geekish and socially awkward individuals, could probably get a diagnosis if we wanted the money badly enough.