The post is quite long and emotional, which can sometimes weaken its impact.
I understand your frustration with people who believe in conspiracy theories, but some parts of your post come off as judgmental or sarcastic (e.g., “dumb takes,” “did it to herself,” etc.). While some readers may relate to this tone, it might alienate those you are actually trying to reach — especially skeptics. You may succeed in expressing your feelings, but not necessarily in changing minds.

It would be more effective if you included some data or sources.
It’s great that you mentioned the impact of vaccines on diseases like polio and smallpox, as well as during COVID-19. But to strengthen your argument, it would be helpful to include at least some facts or references — for example, how many lives were saved according to the WHO or CDC? What report specifically discussed the resurgence of polio in the Philippines?

Not everyone who is hesitant about vaccines is a conspiracy theorist.
Some people have doubts or fears about vaccines not because they believe in microchips, but because of more personal reasons — like past trauma, lack of access to accurate information, or bad experiences with the health system. It would be better to clarify the difference, so your message can be more inclusive and compassionate.

Your closing is clever but still carries sarcasm.
That final line — “or maybe I am and was just using me to write this post” — is witty, but it may also come across as mocking to people who still have doubts. If your goal is to inform and encourage understanding, it might be more effective to end with an invitation to ask questions, do research, and listen to experts, rather than with ridicule.

Final suggestion:
Writing about science, health, and belief requires a careful balance — the truth must be clear, but so should the tone and sensitivity toward your audience. Your intention is good, but it might have more impact if delivered in a way that not only informs, but invites understanding.