I apologise for any personal attacks.

I don't think we're quite on the same page when it comes to facts but I won't labour that point. However when you say "He knows more than you and I about vaccine safety for children, as he has access to privileged info" I have to strongly disagree. If he is privy to that information why does he make such outrageous claims that fly in the face of empirical evidence?

You also seem to be implying that I'm simply coming up with Google searches when what I'm doing is presenting links that simply make my case. They are not my proofs. I could expand on all my claims but that would take considerable time that I don't have. My article, which I gave you a link to, didn't take 5 minutes.