I don't think you watched the videos. Their facts and arguments are what matter. I didn't say they were "experts" with vaccines, I said they were more "prominen

I don't think you watched the videos. Their facts and arguments are what matter. I didn't say they were "experts" with vaccines, I said they were more "prominent" than us, and I asked "what do _you_ object to?" from those videos. Arguing to authority is a logical fallacy any ways. Peer reviewed papers does not mean they are true. There are plenty of peer reviewed papers that disagree with each other or have results that are not reproducible. Edit: I recommend anyone that think "peer review" means that a paper is automatically true to research how the peer review process works and also the results. (there was a scandal this past year or so on peer reviewed papers, most of them medical papers)