the ad hominem attack, has been the weapon of choice, for pro-vaccine people.
they will never debate the actual nuts and bolts of the various claims made by "anti-vaxxers",
but what they will do instead, is to attack the character, reputation, experience, credibility, etc of anyone making any anti-vaccine argument.
and because of this kind of behavior, is a BIG RED FLAG,
that something is very wrong with the vaccine narrative.
the pro-vaccine side ought to be able to have an honest debate, and work out the details of the various claims, without resorting to childish ad hominem attacks.
they will even dismiss the parents of vaccine injured children, because they are "only parents", and presumably not qualified to make medical observations, such as reading 105F on their thermometer.
probably the biggest, and most common, and most egregious, fallacy,
is the ad hominem attack.
ad hominem: to the man:
in a debate, to attack the person, or source,
instead of addressing their main points.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem
the ad hominem attack, has been the weapon of choice, for pro-vaccine people.
they will never debate the actual nuts and bolts of the various claims made by "anti-vaxxers",
but what they will do instead, is to attack the character, reputation, experience, credibility, etc of anyone making any anti-vaccine argument.
and because of this kind of behavior, is a BIG RED FLAG,
that something is very wrong with the vaccine narrative.
the pro-vaccine side ought to be able to have an honest debate, and work out the details of the various claims, without resorting to childish ad hominem attacks.
they will even dismiss the parents of vaccine injured children, because they are "only parents", and presumably not qualified to make medical observations, such as reading 105F on their thermometer.