Simple Greg.

Follow the bouncing ball.  Or just read the long post I wrote.  Think confounders - does that make it easy?

And then there's Nigeria, where hundreds of people died in the early 2000's when they withdrew vaccinations.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18690921

I thought these diseases were naturally going away, according to your graphs?  No, instead here, in the Western World, the mortality has reduced through better standards of living, health, hygiene, etc, but incidence didn't change until vaccinations.  Your graphs don't show that, mine did.  It's what's missing that's important.

In Nigeria, where the health, hospitals, hygiene, etc, aren't up to scratch, when the incidence returned, so too did the deaths, by the hundreds.

Do you want to incidence to go up again?  That's what you're missing, and that's what's important in your interpretation.  You're looking at one graph, an not the whole picture.  The graph of the data is correct.  Your conclusion isn't.

Maybe I'll tell my Nigeria story (and my UK, Japan and Sweden story as well) when you show them your graph.

Good day.