I quoted enough to prick people's interest to hopefully get you to read the whole article... but that must be too much to ask. So you also quote out of context.
I note you chose not to quote this part:
"Vaccines are one of the most effective methods of controlling infectious disease."
OK now Phleebag is trying to imply something the article doesn't say, that vaccines have basically not changed in 100 years and that they are ineffective. The article of course clearly demonstrates in the first line that the latter is not at all what is being said (you know, the part Phlee dishonestly didn't quote). The truth is that there are plenty of new technologies in vaccines today that simply weren't around 100 years ago. 100 years ago something like a conjugate vaccine was unheard of, now it is commonplace. Recombinant vaccines? Yup those are new too.
These newer vaccines involve a process of identifying the leading variations of a pathogen responsible for disease. Considering the cost of manufacturing these vaccines ensuring that the right variations are covered in the vaccine is an obviously essential planning step.