I think misinformation should be countered on merit of science. Something like Dr Prasad presented is the best way to arrive at an agreement that he is misinformed. The issue is that RFK has a half truth. Yes, CDC suffers from regulatory capture, yes there are a few vaccine out there that have small amounts of ingredients that contain mercury, yes autism spectrum disorder has been on the rise according to CDC (but not because of vaccine!), and yes big pharma enjoys legal protection from "vaccine injuries". Does that warrent his level of vaccine scepticism? In my opinion it doesn't, but I don't think RFK is the audience that needs convincing. His viewers, and those that see the half truth and buy the argument need to be informed. Framing it as a debate sounds adversarial, but a joint effort to discover truth should resonate with everyone. Otherwise it just looks like we are avoiding the discovery of some inconvenient truth. I don't know why you say RFK is acting in bad faith or has no interest in truth, but it seems we could discover whether that is true or not too, so why not?