I find this offensive?
We're spending science mind power, money and time researching a way to make a drug that replaces a persons weakness of character and lack of willpower.
That is an excellent statement of the moral issues involved. Here are some more issues to consider:
Measles: We are spending science effort, money, and time producing a vaccine that replaces a person's physical weakness.
(Is character and lack of willpower a learned trait, or conditioned by physical attributes? Should we force people into weight-watchers and exercise programs?)
Guns: Guns have a protection effect similar to vaccines. Even though the probability of being self-injured by a gun goes up if you own one(*), the aggregate total chance of death from all causes goes down for the neighborhood. It's a sort of "herd immunity" for crime.
(Is restricting guns better or worse for society in general, as measured by the mortality rate?)
Flu: We are spending science effort, money, and time producing a vaccine who's purpose is largely to increase manufacturing productivity; ie - to keep you at work for an extra 5 days during the winter (**).
(Is it worth millions of people each spending $35 for a vaccine that's only partially effective?)
And note that everything mentioned is a probability, and that there is a probability of having a bad reaction to any individual shot. The probability is very low, but it's not zero.
(If the probability that the child will get the disease is lower than the probability that they will get a bad reaction, should we still force them to get vaccinated?)
What we have is a spectrum of efficacy weighed against the morality of forcing someone to do (or not do) something. The measles (and smallpox and polio) vaccine is on one end, while the Lyme vaccination is probably on the other.
Where do we draw the line with forcing people to do things? Is "living in society" a strong enough reason to go against someone's religious beliefs? Do the beliefs have to be religious to qualify for an exception?
Are we ready to ditch the doctrine of individual dissent, or must everyone bow to the wishes of society?
Where do we draw that line?
(*) Mostly due to suicide, and as has been pointed out, suicides will happen whether guns are available or not.
(**) Yes, the flu can kill and it's miserable to have, but the marketing is all about not losing work due to sick days. Go online and try to determine whether getting the flu shot is *effective* - you won't find studies, all you'll find is people saying "of course it is!". Science by authority, and all that.