“Another vaccination fallacy is, that its supposed ‘protection’ is in proportion to the number of ‘marks.’ Who counts the marks on the patients? Interested persons; and consequently when the marks are obliterated by the disease, the partisans of the poisoning theory give their fallacy the benefit of the doubt, and generally register the patients as ‘unvaccinated.'”
“But, no sooner is the epidemic over and the danger as they suppose past, than back they go to their Vaccination-peans and their per-centages again !-just as the savages pick up and reinstate their abused idols, when thanks to some other agency the danger has passed by.”
“At first, all agreed with Jenner, that one vaccination protected a person for life, against small-pox ; this, however, was soon found to be untrue. Then, one thorough vaccination in infancy and one after puberty, were deemed necessary. This also proved a delusion. Its advocates next advised the practice to be repeated at maturity, and finally it was thought necessary to assure perfect immunity, that vaccination should be repeated every three or four years.” — Robert A. Gunn, Vaccination: Its Fallacies and Evils, around 1877
“Conflicts of interest in vaccine safety research” by Gayle DeLong
Vaccine manufacturers have financial motives and public health officials have bureaucratic reasons that might lead them to sponsor research that concludes vaccines are safe.
The notion of measuring risks of one vaccine relative to another in order to determine safety is not science, but sophistry. There is a world of difference between the relative risk of taking one poison instead of another poison and the absolute risk of taking one poison as opposed to no poison at all.