So where does all this leave us? Let's bring the numbers together. A paediatric Engerix-B vaccine contains 0.25 mg of aluminium. That's approximately the mass of one ordinary 0.5 mm grain of salt. Aluminium is also naturally ingested through milk and formula, sometimes in quantities exceeding that mass daily. But ingested and injected aluminium are not biologically equivalent. The distinction matters. What matters more is the scientific evidence. We have pharmacokinetic research, decades of clinical experience, large population studies and a 2026 systematic review that collectively provide substantial reassurance about aluminium-adjuvanted vaccine safety. We also have evidence of real, generally localised adverse reactions and unresolved uncertainty about some rare outcomes. And we have a virus that, when acquired in infancy, can establish lifelong infection and eventually cause fatal liver disease. The question isn't whether aluminium is present. It is. The question is whether the evidence demonstrates a clinically important risk from that exposure, and how that risk compares with the benefits of vaccination. The available evidence strongly supports the safety of aluminium-adjuvanted childhood vaccines. That's a conclusion drawn from studying actual health outcomes, not from pretending that 0.25 mg is magically harmless because it sounds small. Understand the dose. Understand the exposure. Understand the evidence. And understand the disease we're preventing.