I don't think this book was well researched or well thought out.

The whole book is on the fence about this issue, which is odd, because one would think a strong opinion would be a precursor to a book on an important subject.

This book feels like it was written just for the sake of it, just because the writer is indeed a writer and has words, however mundane, to say. She agrees to disagree with both the standard vaccine history and justifications, but also with the anti vax camp, though she does lean more towards pro vax.

Again this is odd, I never really understood "agree to disagree, let's all be on the fence together" attitude, I personally believe what I believe for a reason, hopefully because I researched or at least thought about it until I was on one side of the fence. If the issue is important then surely the disagreement is important - someone is right, and that matters - if it wasn't important and the disagreement didn't matter ("meh"), then why write a book about it?

In any case I doubt this book would persuade anyone of anything, and so it constitutes in my opinion a rather serious waste of time.

Do not recommend.