A blanket condemnation of vaccines is inappropriate, as is the insistence on a mono-culture of 99% preventions but with commensurate side effects which are sometimes worse than the disease. The myth there is nothing we can do about viruses was debunked just after WW II.
If a vaccine is the only possible treatment that's fine, but where other protocols exist that have been proven to work how is it appropriate that industry misleads the public claiming they don't work instead of pointing out there are options.
The anti vaxx movement is not all people that believe in the mercury/autism myth, many simply don't need vaccines and they are for other reasons not vulnerable to the disease the vaccine is meant to prevent - there's more than one way to skin a cat as it were. Furthermore, by focusing nearly exclusively on surface proteins and inoculations it obviates the need to understand the pathogen and find away to kill it. Certain viruses because of their genes, can never have a vaccine, such as Ebola and HIV, (even if the immune system is trained by an injection, without selenium the immune system can't make the chemicals it needs to kill the virus) and we've spent billions on this in the last 35 years and all we've proved is it isn't possible.
"Klenner's paper (Klenner FR. The treatment of poliomyelitis and other virus diseases with vitamin C. J. South. Med. and Surg., 111:210-214, 1949.) on curing 60 cases of polio in the epidemic of 1948 should have changed the way infectious diseases were treated but it did not." - Robert Cathcart