Here is the original article defending the decision to not vaccinate the author's children http://citybeat.com/renewal/june07/Renewal_06_20_2007.html

Here is my response...

Dear CityBeat Editor,

Bethany Rawlins' article "Raising Vaccine-Free Kids" is based on so many fallicies and misinformed "facts" that if she were to spend even a moment of effort researching her own argument, she would easily talk herself out of it. Vaccinating your children is a parent's responsibility- not to do so (in the face of overwhelming scientific proof of it's safety) is unethical and tremendously dangerous.

Like many other ordinary people, I read the op-ed articles by Robert F. Kennedy that stated strong circumstantial links between autism and the vaccine ingredient thimerosal, which contains trace amounts of mercury. His arguments of a sweeping conspiracy, however, don't stand up to the numerous peer-reviewed scientific studies that disprove any link between immunizations and autism. In addition to those studies, there haven't been any indications that the last six years of mercury-free vaccines have reduced the rates of autism diagnosis. Oddly enough, autism has continued to increase despite the lack of thimerosal on the market. When can we put the baseless thimerosal argument to rest?

Rawlins also suggests, despite any actual evidence, that the aluminum in vaccines may cause alzheimer's disease. What she fails to admit is that breast milk itself contains 40 micrograms of aluminum and infant formula contains nearly 200 grams of aluminum. And while we are on the subject of breastfeeding, Rawlins is completely wrong that any amount of breastfeeding will defend your children from a lifetime risk of catching serious diseases and dying from them. A sugarless dies is also sadly not a legitimate defense against whooping cough or even chickenpox.

In an effort to boost her poor argument with statistics, Rawlins points to the CDC's low numbers of reported cases of rubella and measles. Anyone with half a brain would interpret those numbers as proof that immunization is effective- not the other way around. She need only go to various countries in Africa to find out how much death and disease is caused by vaccine shortages.

Bethany Rawlins states that she is not interested in convincing others to avoid vaccines, merely to defend and explain herself. The problem is that many readers will read her article and be caught in the emotions and paranoia involved with being a parent, and those parents will overlook the many inaccuracies that are peppered throughout her piece.

The simple fact is that vaccines are not completely risk free, but if they directly (or indirectly) caused autism and alzheimer's we would all be afflicted with those diseases. There need not be any debate when the evidence supporting the benefits and safety of vaccination is manifested daily by the billions of healthy people who respect each other by responsibly taking vaccines. Boycotting vaccination (and believing the science-less hype) is not only a negligence to your own children, but it is a danger to society.