Searching for "active" assistance on a matter

[Nevets]

Hello Scientists.

I am a "non" Scientist that has found myself in a frustrating situation.

I am currently debating against vaccine denialists on a debate platform. It is a good little platform in that it is fun to debate things. The evil thing about this however, is that the debaters become conflicted in their interests. They begin arguing just about anything, in order to try and gain points from the voters. A good example of this is another person like myself that debates anti-vaxxers, mistakenly found herself debating against me, when she mistook me for an anti-vaxxer. So she unwittingly found herself debating "against" the importance of sanitation, and she dishonestly continued with this debate, instead of admitting her mistake.

"Horrifically" she has managed to convince a few "anti-vaxxers" that her debate is honest, and she is being awarded points.

The debate i am referring to, is here.

https://www.debateart.com/debates/1847/over-reliance-on-vaccinations-may-lead-to-profiteering-and-poor-sanitation

Now i may not be doing a very good job of arguing my point, i dont know.

But both the users that voted in favour of this woman, are "anti-vaxxers".

You can find their votes by clicking on votes, and you can see the names of the users that voted.

Now one of those users that voted, is currently debating against me, on this thread here. 

https://www.debateart.com/debates/1848/pediatric-study-shows-dtap-does-not-cause-autism-in-under-6-year-olds

Now i am worried, that this user is now attempting to obfuscate the subject behind all types of wordplay objections, that barely have any relevance whatsoever, that his objections might actually be taken seriously by the voters, and yet again, an anti-vaxxer might be seen to win a debate against a person debating against vaccinations causing autism, etc. Just like a vaxxer found herself mistakenly arguing against washing ones hands, for no other reason, than to win points, because she was not honest enough to admit to the voters she had made a mistake. She even attempted to try and invent beliefs in me that i do not hold, to try and give herself something to argue against.

She conned the voters, as a neutral person looking at it from a neutral point of view, should hopefully be able to establish.

This subject might not seem important to some. But it is important to me. 

I am hoping to receive some assistance from the science community. That have the scienctific knowledge to know that having criticisms about "over reliance" on vaccines is nowhere near the same thing as being against vaccines.

At the beginning of round 1, i wrote "Now the debate i am having here, in no way contradicts my belief in the good, and importance, of vaccines."

My debate was that "to concentrate to much on vaccines and forget sanitation" is not good. Sanitation is important. Whether i made that "clear" i dont know.

So i am looking for someone with scientific knowledge, that also agrees that sanitation is important, and that an over reliance on vaccines could lead to forgetting about sanitation.

And i am also looking for someone with scientific knowledge about Tdap and Dtap vaccinations not causing autism.

I am ultimately looking for people with scientific background, that are willing to forgive my lack of clarity, and believe this is an important subject, to help me out and make sure that the results of the debates i am having are reflective of the pro scientific contemporary understandings i am debating for