They've published their data, which is fantastic and by far the most important part of the article. <a href="http://www.tycho.pitt.edu/" rel="nofollow">http://www.tycho.pitt.edu/</a><p>I have to take issue with some parts of the article. Lohr (the NYT article's Author) cites 38,000 cases of Pertussis in the US. It may just be a coincidence, but 38,000 is the number of cases recently reported in Australia. The CDC reports[1] 27,550 for 2010 (an awesomely precise estimate), so, 38k doesn't sound out of line, but I didn't find a source for that number. Going back to Australia where they have 95% compliance according to this news article[2], they suspect that mutation of the pathogen is responsible for the rise in cases. The NYT article OTOH, lays the blame on non-compliant parents. Additionally, the acellular Pertussis vaccine apparently doesn't always prevent illness, but lessens the severity and duration of infection. So, it could well be that most of the reported cases were vaccinated as was the case in Australia.<p>I wonder why authors feel the need to keep re-writing the standard pro-vaccination puff pieces. They don't seem to do anything to convince skeptics. I'd like to see a study of why people choose to refuse vaccines and apply those results to efforts to increase vaccination rates.<p>[1] <a href="http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/whooping.htm" rel="nofollow">http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/whooping.htm</a><p>[2] <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/health/thepulse/stories/2012/08/14/3567495.htm" rel="nofollow">http://www.abc.net.au/health/thepulse/stories/2012/08/14/356...</a>