A provocative name. An evidence-led purpose.
ANTIVAX.co.uk exists to examine vaccine claims, controversies and risk without asking readers to join a side. The aim is to make evidence easier to understand, show where uncertainty exists, and separate historical controversy from current knowledge.
What we publish
Claim vs Evidence
Focused explainers that identify a claim, examine the strongest available evidence and show where the conclusion comes from.
Understanding Risk
Plain-English explanations of statistics, adverse-event reporting, absolute versus relative risk, and why context matters.
Controversy Archive
A historical record of major vaccine debates, with timelines, sources and later evidence placed alongside the original controversy.
Editorial philosophy
Evidence before position
We do not begin with a requirement that a page reach a pro-vaccine or anti-vaccine conclusion. The question comes first; the strength and relevance of the available evidence determine the wording.
Show the reasoning
Readers should be able to distinguish the claim, the evidence, material uncertainty and editorial interpretation, then follow identifiable sources wherever practical.
Context before counts
Safety reports, study results and risk figures are presented with the context needed to understand what they can establish and what they cannot.
Correction and review
Substantive factual errors should be corrected, and material medical pages should be reviewed when important evidence or authoritative guidance changes.
Editorial safeguards
We aim to cite identifiable sources, distinguish correlation from causation, label opinion clearly, correct substantive errors, and review medical pages as evidence changes. Commercial relationships must not determine evidence conclusions. Full details are set out in our Editorial Standards and Medical Evidence Review Policy.