If people could be persuaded to do things that are in their interest via rational discourse, and evidence favored vaccines, it wouldn't be necessary to do that kind of coercion. (Nor would it be necessary to so strenuously resist getting them, you'd just say "here is the evidence I don't need to get this," and everyone would accept it and let you live your life.) That's my whole point.
This is Marxist-level thinking.
See paying taxes, conscription, jury duty
Though judging the level of risk is very hard and there is often not a clear line of when force is needed.
Interesting. Of course, in this particular case that coercion happens to coincide with a position you agree with, but not in every instance that apparently justifiable coercion will agree with you. I assume, for the sake of consistency, you'll defend them in that case too.