Because a conclusion is incorrect do not imply that everything that lead to this conclusion is incorrect.

First, your obviously struggle to convince people. So even if this is the only objective, we have to inform ourselves better to understand what we are missing. This is a better stand, but I think this is still an issue : we don’t really listen people if we think they are wrong.

If our stand is right, this is not an issue to try to prove it wrong. So let’s discuss in order to be proven that vaccines shall not be trusted. I mean, with reliable sources and shit. However personal experiences are reliable sources, but not as much as collective one which and not as scientific consensus.

And their is some serious concerns about vaccines : in Africa, some vaccines campaign was used to use people as test-subject, Falashas has been collectively sterilized. Those are not exception, coloniale and oppressive context regularly use health to justify oppression (on race, gender, sexual orientation or origin).

So if we took what seems obvious to us in order to help, we may just reproduce what other people from the social origins use to oppress. In this conditions, the intuition to oppose to our speech is a good one. To do that, we have to value the knowledge of the exact same people that we may look down upon otherwise