Yea exactly, sometimes you have to trust your doctor. If a doctor is constantly giving you prescriptions for everything it's suspect. You pay doctor for diagnosis, pharma company pays doctor more to recommend drug, you pay for drugs, you pay doctor even more when you have to go back for all the side effects of said drug. This reminds me of the fml where the guy took a drug for one problem, which gave him another problem, which he took another drug for, which in turn had a side effect that compounded the original problem. Think his doctor cared much? Who wins in that situation?

50, no vaccines have thimerosal in them anymore. That was taken out years ago.

The possibility of side effects are very low and most of them are very minor such as a sore arm or headache. The FML didn't state which vaccines, other than the flu shot, the OP's daughter received and thus some of them could be vital such as polio or measles which can be devastating in children. While OP and his wife should have discussed it, leaving someone because of this and trying to take their child is a horrible over reaction and I hope any judge who has sense or respect for the law would never take away someone's child on that basis.

True, in some cases, but we're not talking about effects of vaccines on foetuses...

Where were they proven harmful in most cases? I know of no one personally that ever had a bad reaction to a shot ever besides a couple sore arms, and the ones with sore arms usually never had high pain tolerances anyways.

Could you please cite, which pseudo-scientists have proven vaccines to be so harmful?

I remember you from a previous FML comment saying grades weren't important. If vaccines were so bad for you why would they use them? You clearly have your facts wrong or just made them up. Do some real research.

I've been trying to argue more on the anti-vaccine side (not sayings it's right, just explaining why you might feel that way) and even I know you're an idiot! There have been occasional bad reactions to vaccines but they're one in a million, not 'most cases'.

85-I agree that bad side effects don't occur in most cases. But as for the reason vaccines would still be administered even if they were found to be dangerous: MONEY. That's really all the pharmaceutical companies care about. There are certain vaccines that can have severe side effects (Gardasil, for example) that are still on the market and being pushed.

Alright 199, let's roll with your premise that greed would motivate pharmaceutical companies to push ineffective, harmful vaccines on the populace. And heck, let's pretend that the CDC and the FDA(or the equivalent wherever you may live) doesn't test and regulate them and try to eliminate the ineffective. Somewhere along the line, the public would realize "Hey! This doesn't work at all!" This will lead to loss of faith in a company's product, the tarnishing of the company name and reputation and loss of business. Granted companies make mistakes and that's why we have agencies to regulate them and most negative side effects are very very rare. But producing quality vaccines is good for business and the idea that a company would willing produce a poor vaccine is quite absurd.

Wow, what a load of.... Either you work for a pharmaceutical company or you just really don't have a clue. Either way i pity you.