*fuck your down vote
*fuck your down vote
Btw: if the number drops to actual zero, we do halt vaccinations, like we did with smallpox. There are zero patients, the last few patients were research lab accidents. Nobody is vaccinated against smallpox these days.
> "how many of the bad outcomes bieng "prevented", are actualy caused by mothers bad habbits and poor health"
Bad habits and poor health only matter, and only a bit, if the number of infections is ridiculously low, and while I get that during your entire life this has been the case, please look at some old films and get yourself informed about the bloody handkerchiefs.
Right now catching tuberculosis, you could say things like that it's not going to happen unless you spend a lot of time with an infected person in Africa, or in some "unsanitary part of" the third world. Otherwise ... it won't happen. True.
BUT if Tuberculosis starts spreading we'll be back to the situation 100 years ago in no time: spending even short amounts of time in a place where a number of infected stayed for whatever reason and you'll be infected ... and die in 2 years. We'll be back to the situation where caring for Tuberculosis patients is essentially a death sentence (meaning if you care for a lot of Tuberculosis patients, it does not matter how careful you are. You are absurdly careful and clean and ... after 5 years you'll find yourself infected. If not? 2 years. So who's going to care for those patients?)
It sounds like you're trying to save a very small amount of money, and for those tiny savings you're running the risk of creating not just a nationwide disaster, but a global disaster for everyone. The logic behind vaccines is just that: if enough people stop taking vaccines, millions will die, NOT just the ones that stop taking vaccines. And that's in the US alone.
If you must know, if vaccines cause an issue, it's called a "cytokine storm" and it happens in the single digits per million infections.