HN has a long history of being very strongly pro-vaccine.
No. HN has a long history of being pro-evidence. (As opposed to being pro-vaccine). If you give us strong, irrefutable evidence that vaccines cause harm, and you give us an alternative that is - again - proven to be comparable, there is a high probability that we would all turn on a dime.
I've participated in threads like this before. I can't find the quote, but someone once said something to me along the lines of "They disagree with you because it is an insanely stupid position." It got lots of upvotes. So I believe the view here is biased in a pro-vaccine way. Most of the conversations here concerning vaccines don't dispassionately discuss the facts. Instead, they routinely make sweeping negative characterizations of the anti-vax crowd. It's always a pleasure when someone here asks genuinely interested questions concerning my views. But a lot of the replies (to me and to others who are not anti-vax) are basically attacking and dismissive.
There are a lot of "positions" we're not going to be able to have an evenhanded conversation about. Positions that seem to have the effect of killing kids are probably among them.
No. HN has a long history of being pro-evidence. (As opposed to being pro-vaccine). If you give us strong, irrefutable evidence that vaccines cause harm, and you give us an alternative that is - again - proven to be comparable, there is a high probability that we would all turn on a dime.