I know you're being helpful but providing anecdotes like these is actually not helpful. The problem is that anecdotes seem to provide meaningful data but they actually don't; you need to zoom out to see the statistical perspective to understand what's going on.

It seems harmless to do it in a positive way (promoting vaccination) but by using the technique of anecdotal evidence, you enable others to negatively use the same technique (the two people they know were fine without vax) to argue that vaccines don't work.

In both cases the anecdotal evidence is actually worse than no evidence because it can be misleading to people who think anecdotes are useful evidence.