I have reached the same conclusion. A big red pill on this subject, imo, is a paper written in 1918 by a Dr. Frederick Gates, MD entitled "A Report on Antimeningitis Vaccination and Observations on Agglutinins in the Blood of Chronic Meningococcus Carriers" It may be hard to locate on line, but could still be found the last time I looked.
I rather wonder if the idea that antibodies fundamentally represent "immunity" is fallacious. It seems that once the body has responded to a pathogen, antibodies (agglutinins?) decrease. The presence of antibodies suggests to me that an infection is CHRONIC. If vaccines fundamentally induce a carrier state for a bacterial pathogen, as it seems that the do in the case of pertussis our understanding of immunity and vaccine "science" is woefully, and perhaps deliberately, flawed.
If you bother to read the Gates paper, you will see several interesting things. The location of the research is the exact epicenter of the start of "Spanish flu" according to some sources.
Here's an interesting quote: "..the factor of individual susceptibility was prominent, a few officers and men suffering severely from doses which caused no general discomfort in the great majority of the men. In general, the more severe reactions occurred among the commis-sioned officers, and especially among the medical officers at the Base Hospital and in the Medical Officers' Training Camp at Fort Riley, due in part perhaps to more confining occupations, higher nervous tension, and more introspection than was common among the enlisted men." (I think he was already identifying which highly and intellectually talented people could be significantly damaged by a vaccine a la the deliberate destruction of America's young men in particular with toxic vaccines today.)