I believe what you are arguing Monica, is that currently the number of measles cases and their outcomes do not warrant childhood vaccination en masse. Correct me if I am wrong.

Gert Vanden Bossche has discussed this topic on multiple occasions explaining that if you halt the measles vaccine as an example, you will remove this herd immunity (that you use in your argument) for future generations. At some point in the future, you may reach pre-vaccination levels of cases and outcomes. I believe EGM used similar numbers above to demonstrate that having an outbreak of measles would be overall worse for the population, than suffering consequences for mass vaccination. He was comparing a hypothetical extreme to the current mainstream extreme, to determine the overall risk/benefit for the population. Please correct me if I am mistaken.

I do agree that more robust and current analysis is needed for these vaccines. More importantly would be long term analysis on vaccination vs immunization through infection (natural immunity) and an emphasis on measurement with clearly defined and useful endpoints such as all cause mortality, while minimizing potential confounders (socio-economic status, access to healthcare etc).

We do not have the data to conclude that certain vaccines are preferable to contracting the disease they should immunize against, however there isn't sufficient concrete evidence to risk recurring mass outbreaks either.