It’s no exactly clear what point you’re trying to make, or why you’ve switched from complaining about Hep B vaccination to pertussis. If you want to look at the risks of disease vs vaccination for pertussis, here are some facts (again from the CDC and FDA primarily, since I generally find these and NIH the most complete, and I expect impartial sources).
Most serious in infants, though can have life-threatening consequences in older children also.
Pneumonia-5.2% of all cases, 11.8% of cases in children < 6 mos old
Seizures- 0.8% total cases, 3% in infants (from 5-minute Pediatric Consult)
Encephalopathy- 0.1% total cases, 0.9% in infants (from 5-minute Pediatric Consult)
Hospitalization-20% total cases
Death 0.2% total cases (85% of these deaths are among infants, and they have a death rate of 0.5-1% of cases; infants also make up 30% of the cases reported to CDC)
Antibiotics are used to treat secondary complications and reduce spread, but they are not curative, and in 2002 according to WHO there were 294,000 deaths worldwide, most in areas with low vaccination rates and poor quality supportive care. Thus, while supportive care and medications help reduce the death rate, they are less effective than vaccination. CUrrent subunit vaccines were 80-85% effective in preventing infection in clinical trials.
Vaccine: (CDC and 5 minute Pediatric Consult)
Anaphylaxis-2 cases/100,000 vaccinations (0.00002%)
Seizures- 1/1750 vaccinations (0.0006%)
hypotonic/hyporesponsive state- 1/1750 (0.0006%)
Crying for 3 hours 1:11 (1%)
Local soreness- 60%
Death- (source=FDA) No one really knows what, if any, mortality rate is attributable to the vaccine. What is often done by vaccine opponents, is to use numbers of deaths reported following vaccination as a death rate attributed to the vaccine. This, of course, is dishonest and misleading because the reports of death in vaccinated children say only that there was a temporal relationship between getting the vaccine and death. No evidence is provided that the vaccine was responsible for death, and we all know that correlation in time is not proof of a causal relationship.
SIDS is often mentioned as a possible vaccine-related death, but in two different trials (one in Italy, one in Germany) with over 22,000 children in each trial, the rate of SIDS was 0.3-0.5/1,000 infants (0.0003-0.0004%). The reported rate if SIDS in the US 1.2/1000 live births irrespective of vaccination status, so it is impossible to use these numbers to demonstrate SIDS as a cause of mortality from pertussis vaccine. Even if it were (which is unlikely given the numbers), the death rate of 0.0004% is a hell of a lot lower than the 0.2-1% for the disease itself)
Finally, the incidence of the disease has decreased 80% since widespread vaccination began, and while it has rebounded somewhat in the US in the last 20 years, liekly due to the increase in the number of unvaccinated adults from elsewhere in the world, it is still far lower than before vaccination. Note, that I am talking about the number of cases, not just the number of deaths, so your point about better antibiotics and supportive care is irrelevant to the issue of whether the vaccine prevents the disease (and I’ve already explained above why it is wrong in terms of arguing that the disaese is now treatable so vaccination is unnecessary).
So once again, I find your data incorrect and your conclusions not justified by it. You claim to be presenting a “balanced” analysis, and yet I find the information you give either wrong or presented in a misleading fashion. Nothing will convince you that vaccination does more good than harm. A well-designed study of sufficient size and power could convince me that any given vaccine does more harm than good, so you can keep looking for them and if you find one let me know. Certainly, medical science makes mistakes, times change, and vaccination protocols need to be constantly reviewed in light of accumulating evidence. But the evidence for the sweepinganti-vaccination case you’re trying to make just isn’t there.