[strombad]

I think we could safely say there are three distinct groups in this discussion:

Pro Vaccine
Believe in the benefits of vaccine, come from a large variety of backgrounds and utilise varied sources of scientific information to sort their claims. Scientific information is either trusted after critical thinking or trusted outright. Science is key, critical thinking is important but not always utilised.

Anti-Vaccine
Rely on misinformation and claims proven distinctly false to backup their claim, use information sourced only from those without scientific credibility. Claim to be thinking, but blatantly ignore any actual pieces of information. Neither science nor critical thinking are deemed important.

Question Science
Claim to be of a pro-vaccine stance while preaching less criticism of the anti-vax crowd and more criticism of science. Claim critical thinking is important, but can't be bother to think critically about both sides of the argument, so they sit essentially in the middle. Generally untrusting of 'Big Pharm' or regulated bodies that may profit. Science is secondary to critical thinking.

I don't know what I find more bothersome, the anti-vaccine crowd or the pseudo intellectual crowd that praise critical thinking and 'what if' over cold, hard evidence. On one hand, you have the anti-vaccine crowd. Their a fun bunch, similar to (as previously stated) the 'world is flat' group, and 'cigarettes aren't bad at all!' group. Both looked on historically with laughter. On the other? The great 'voices of reason'! Capable, apparently, of greater critical thinking than the general population. Ironically, these people are only actually critical of science, and take a stance that (while not directly defending anti-vaxx) looks more favourably on a position where absolutely no critical thinking is utilised to come to their conclusion (anti-vax) over a position that is the most logically sound with or without critical thinking.

In short, yeah, we get it, you don't trust big pharm but you get vaccinated anyway, clearly you're misunderstanding the conversation if you think you're some how more intellectually sound than pro-vaxx. If anything, you're much closer to the anti-vaxx crowd than the crowd that can ACTUALLY use critical thinking and scientific information to come to their conclusion.

I swear, the "Wow you pro-vaxxers are mean!" crowd would pipe down if we were making fun of someone who said "The sun isn't hot," which, frankly, is about as sound of a claim as "vaccines are more dangerous than not getting them (autism!!!!)".