What gets my goat is the propaganda that goes like this: "Vaccines are a victim of their own success. Things are so good now, and have been so good for so long, that people have forgotten how terrible they were in the pre-vaccine days." (By "pre-vaccine days" they generally mean the days before the advent of the vaccines for the common "childhood diseases".) They then go on to say that, as the years pass, we have fewer and fewer people who can testify to the appalling toll that these diseases took before the late 1960s.
I always respond by saying that I had all the common "childhood diseases" in the 1940s - as did everyone else I knew - and that I never heard of anyone dying. "Oh, but some people DID die," they respond. They're right, of course. If you look hard enough, especially in poverty-stricken areas (like Africa today), you WILL find deaths. But do we all have to be vaccinated for that reason? "Yes," they say, "because we will then create 'herd immunity', and these poor people in deprived areas will be protected." But what about the deaths and damage caused by the vaccines, including the spread of the disease(s) in question by the "viral shedding" of the recently vaccinated?
That's when you hit the BRICK WALL. In my experience, the medical people almost never admit that vaccines - even the notorious experimental anthrax vaccine - cause anything more that a sore arm, and maybe a headache or fever for a few hours. You can give a toddler six vaccines in a single visit to the doctor, and he or she can start suffering seizures that night. It rarely makes any difference. You will almost certainly be unable to convince your doctor that the child's sudden deterioration, which may end in autism or even death (SIDS), has anything to do with the vaccines. "It's just a coincidence." "The child has/had a genetic problem." "It would have happened anyway." "Correlation doesn't equal causation." "Peer-reviewed studies show..." "The science is settled." "There is no debate." Blah, blah blah.
If all else fails, they challenge you to prove your contention - as if the onus were on you to prove that vaccines are dangerous, not on them to prove that vaccines are safe, as the precautionary principle demands.
I have lost count of the number of times I have got into this kind of silly, circuitous argument with a doctor - or a troll pretending to be a doctor. It really is depressing. Like Wally, I refuse to have my life medicalized, and go to the doctor only in exceptional circumstances.