If you have valid, replicatable evidence where vaccines cause harm, I'm all ears.

But if you're going to rely on anecdotal evidence, GTFO. I'm tired of hearing people not vaccinating their children and causing public health issues because they believe they're more informed than the CDC.

By "allergic reaction", I assume the g'parent poster did not mean only an allergy to the virus particles or fragments in the vaccine, but also included an allergy to the other components of the given formulation.

Some people have an egg allergy. Some vaccines are made using chicken embryos, the vaccine includes some of the egg protein, and some people are allergic even to this slight amount.

For an overview you can start with http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egg_allergy#Vaccine_hazard

The journal citations are easily accessible.

First, these allergies are quite rare. "Estimates of true allergic, or immediate hypersensitivity, reactions to routine vaccines range from 1 per 50000 doses for diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis to approximately 1 per 500000 to 1000000 doses for most other vaccines." says http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20349363 .

There are protocols for those with egg allergies, so most (95%) don't have a severe reaction to at least the flu vaccine: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20368312

Another possible source of allergies is gelatin: "[The researchers] suggested that previous receipt by these patients of diphtheria-tetanus-acellular pertussis vaccines with trace amounts of gelatin was responsible for the sensitization," leading to an analysis which suggests that "Almost one fourth of patients with reported anaphylaxis after MMR seem to have hypersensitivity to gelatin in the vaccine." http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12456938

Those were the allergies I was referring to in my original post. Thank you for providing not only the relevant info, but also the corresponding Wikipedia and Pubmed links.

Here's an example where vaccines cause harm: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/story/2012/09...

By and large though, vaccines are amazing. Just the fact that we have a vaccine which can protect against influenza is pretty fantastic. Life unfortunately always throws you spanners, so even though I think the people who live in the vaccine autism universe are bat shit crazy, it's still good to have people taking both sides of the issue. This is despite how freaking frustrating it can be when one side is arguing with opinion and the other is arguing with facts.

Well it's still possible to be pro-vaccine in general but against a specific vaccine that does not hold up its end of the risk/reward bargain.

There aren't simply two sides where 1 is always pro-vaccine and the other is always quoting Wakefield.

Absolutely. I wasn't trying to paint it as a black and white argument at all, and in fact, quite the contrary.

The people who are against vaccinations are mostly idiots, however, scientists are not infallible. Sometimes they lapse into politics too.

Both sides of the issue with evidence. Yours is the first I've read here. Most people, most discussions involving vaccinations don't come close to sensibility.