200 Evidence-Based Reasons NOT To Vaccinate



200 Evidence-Based Reasons NOT To Vaccinate is a notorious, 200-example-long proof by verbosity of cherry-picked and blatantly misrepresented study abstracts, all in the preconceived attempt to simply arrive at the conclusion that  vaccination is supposedly bad. 200 Reasons has been promoted heavily across the various fringes and quack watering holes of the Internet, not least through the many reposts of the list by its crank author, Sayer Ji.

200 Reasons contains very little context for each of the 200 "reasons", which are all shrunken down to a bias statement using scientific-sounding language, a hyperlink to the article, and information about the authors, publishers, etc. of the article - that is to say, to the average reader of this list, pure padding meant to make it look less shoehorned and more representative of research than it actually is.

None of the reasons given provide any meaningful analysis or context, reducing the list to nothing more than a really long and really tedious Gish gallop, most probably constructed via the renowned research method of typing in the search terms "vaccine" + "[scary word]" into Google Scholar and cherrypicking to your blackened heart's content.

And to anyone reading the .pdf itself (available at the bottom of this page), notice how it almost always says "- GMI Summary" (especially by the most scary sounding "reasons"). That is quack rhetoric for "this isn't what the study says at all", and clicking the link demonstrates this without fail.

Description
Ji's description of 200 Reasons on GreenMedInfo starts with:

This seems like a good place to start -- when a scientific field near-unanimously agrees that something is true, it's a good bet that it is. However, Ji continues:

Ji manages to create both a straw man -- that health organizations claim vaccines are completely (rather than almost always) safe -- and a conspiracy theory -- that the opposing literature has been purposely ignored or even censored.

"Cumulative knowledge"
200 Reasons is similar to a metastudy, in that it reports on the research in a field.

Unlike most metastudies, 200 Reasons makes no conclusions or even in-depth analysis of research. Instead, it's really just a list of studies Ji could find that (if seen in the right light) make vaccines look bad.

Also unlike most metastudies, 200 Reasons includes a section on "cumulative knowledge", which would usually be called "metadata", and which would usually have some meaningful role in the study. Ji defines "cumulative knowledge" as:

However, Ji never gives you a breakdown of which are used in any given case, and the math often doesn't add up. Ultimately, the "cumulative knowledge" is poorly defined and poorly arrived at, suggesting that the real goal is appearing impressive.

The 200 reasons
Responding to all 200 reasons would take an inordinate amount of time and effort. However, the first 10 reasons (presented below) are fairly representative of the quality of each of the reasons.