TITLE: The State with the Sickest Children has the Highest Vaccination Rates
SENTENCE 1: Reflecting on the Mississippi Supreme Court’s 1979 elimination of that state’s religious exemption to vaccination, Offit applauds the Court’s position, stating,  “If a parent harbors a religious belief that contradicts a basic tenant [sic] of modern medicine…the state has a right to protect the child from the irresponsible acts of the parent.”  Offit—though a parent himself—tells readers that the state-determined “duty” to vaccinate supersedes other parental rights.
SENTENCE 2: medical examiners and coroners are inconsistent in the cause of death that they apply to sudden unexpected infant deaths and often classify them as “suffocation/asphyxia.” This lack of consistency—and the masking of deaths that may be vaccine-related—“impacts true understanding of infant mortality causes, and inhibits our ability to accurately monitor and ultimately prevent future deaths.”  Coercive tactics  Offit makes it clear that he wants other states to follow Mississippi’s example and take away parental rights to make vaccine decisions.
SENTENCE 3: Calling attention to the “neurotoxic content” of many vaccines and “disturbing evidence” that vaccines may not be as safe as implied, the author, Keith Schofield, calls on government to recognize the potential for toxins in the environment and in vaccines to have damaging synergistic effects and create a neurotoxic “overload” in both humans and fetuses.

Bias label: moderately
Annotator rationales:
Se si mettono in relazione i vaccini con il tasso di problemi per la salute dei bambini, allora si fa disinformazione 
Se si descrivono i vaccini come dannosi per la
Salute, allora si rischia di indurre le persone a evitare le vaccinazioni