But before I get distracted, how many of those articles referenced would I need to debunk before you see the list for what it is, i.e. something to scare with not something used to educate? Ten? Twenty? Tell you what, why don't you actually read all those 99 citations, pick the most relevant ten and I'll tell you why they don't mean what Ginger Taylor claims they mean. But.. if I succeed in explaining why the articles you choose are not "research papers supporting the vaccine autism link", you agree to admit that there is no evidence for vaccines causing autism, and do what a person with integrity would and change your opinion based on evidence.
..and even if they were.. how many graphic examples of children, say, dying from whooping cough because they didn't get a vaccination would you need to counter each case study? Because hundreds or even thousands of times as many children were harmed by disease than have ever been harmed by vaccines. Which is why individual case studies, even if vaccine damage can be shown (remember, nobody here is arguing that vaccines are completely risk-free, just that they are orders of magnitude safer than the diseases they protect against) do not prove your point.