I've been earnestly researching the issues surrounding vaccination, and I chose this book hoping to get some real science to refute what people who oppose mandatory vaccination say. But I was very disappointed.

I felt the authors were simply spouting the official line. I did not feel convinced that the benefits of vaccines outweigh the risks. They glossed over real concerns about vaccines, when they might have taken the opportunity to confront and dispel them head-on. (Unfortunately, the more I research, the more I seem to find this to be the case. Those who support mandatory vaccination cannot categorically refute the arguments of those who question it.)

The one positive about the book is that it does give a good overview of each vaccine and the disease it's intended to prevent, as well important info on special cases. But, if you're just as concerned about your child developing diabetes as you are that she might contract whooping cough (or more concerned about it, as I am), this book won't help clear your concerns.

An extremely helpful book for new parents who are weighing the benefits and risks of vaccination. This book has been extremely helpful to me as a nurse, medical writer/editor, and mother of two young children. It's informative, balanced, well-written, and well-researched. After reading it from cover to cover, I still pull it off the shelf time and again, usually to answer questions for family and friends. I now buy this book for all the new moms I know. And a few dads, too.

Very biased information, conclusions that go against most studies and common sense. Don't waste your time with this book. Go elsewhere and find the books that have logical discussion and actual studies that support the conclusions.

Humiston and Good quote, "Vaccine safety should be based on good science, not hypothesis, opinion, individual beliefs, or observations...." I agree. I got this book hoping to see some "good science" convincing me how effective and safe vaccines are. All I got were pat answers from medical establishments akin to opinion. If you are a concerned parent who wants to make up your own mind after examining empirical, scientific evidence, you won't find any here. You'll find "statistics," but no details to help you determine if the conclusions of the studies cited are warranted, valid, or statistically sound. There is no basic information on sample size or control groups, let alone data on results and statistical significance. Worst yet, Humiston and Good offer very few references, so for most statistics, you cannot even look the study up yourself to get that information.

For example, take the question, "...how effective is [the DTaP vaccine]?" The answer is: "...The current pertussis vaccines are reported to be from 59 to 89 percent effective, so it's important for young children to receive the full five-dose series." This is a typical response to this type of question. No references whatsoever. Am I supposed to just take these people's word for it? I don't even know WHOSE word I am supposed to blindly accept. Then I am supposed to act on this "reported" information and make sure my tiny baby gets stuck five times with needles holding bacteria just because SOMEONE said it was "59-89% effective"? I'm sorry, I need more than this to be convinced. What if those studies showing 59-89% effectiveness were invalid--then I'd be exposing my baby to the risks of vaccinations for some unknown benefit, if any at all.

Let me explain why details are important. A study done in England in the 1940's found that pertussis occurred in 18% of vaccinated children (88% effectiveness), and 87% in unvaccinated children. These numbers appear to be impressive, until you find out that the "unvaccinated" group received a vaccine containing Streptococcus pneumoniae among other agents as a control. These bacterial agents in the control vaccine could have interfered with immunity to pertussis, thus confounding the entire study. The fact that the study was conducted poorly renders the "statistics" scientifically meaningless. [Reference: Scheibner, Viera. Vaccination: 100 Years of Orthodox Research, New Atlantean Press, 1993. P. 16] It is interesting to note that Humiston and Good spared no pains to explain confounding variables when discussing studies that questioned vaccine safety.

This book offers some easy to understand descriptions of diseases and general information in an accessible Q&A format. To the authors' credit, they included case histories of vaccine damage as well as of diseases in question. Beyond this, most of the answers and "statistics" are practically useless for discerning vaccine effectiveness and safety, unless in you have a lot of blind faith in these authors. This book should have been more appropriately titled, "Press Release Answers for the Unquestioning Parent." Questioning parents would be better off with Viera Scheibner's Vaccination: 100 Years of Orthodox Research.

As a new parent it was extemely helpful to read this book. The book clearly outlines why immunizations are an important part of a child's life. I liked the fact that it clearly and simply explains what each disease is that a vaccine can protect against. Descriptions are given about what happens to kids that are not properly immunized - the stories are horrible. I would never want my child to expereice such ills. I also liked the parts in the book that talk about saftey issues. As a new parent I want to do what is best for my child - not put her at risk. I strongly reccomend this book to new and expereinced parents alike.