In this study we approach the complexity of the vaccine debate from a new and comprehensive perspective. Focusing on the Italian context, we examine almost all the online information produced in the 2016-2021 timeframe by both sources that have a reputation for misinformation and those that do not. Although reliable sources can rely on larger newsrooms and cover more news than misinformation ones, the transfer entropy analysis of the corresponding time series reveals that the former have not always informationally dominated the latter on the vaccine subject. Indeed, the pre-pandemic period sees misinformation establish itself as leader of the process, even in causal terms, and gain dramatically more user engagement than news from reliable sources. Despite this information gap was filled during the Covid-19 outbreak, the newfound leading role of reliable sources as drivers of the information ecosystem has only partially had a beneficial effect in reducing user engagement with misinformation on vaccines. Our results indeed show that, except for effectiveness of vaccination, reliable sources have never adequately countered the anti-vax narrative, specially in the pre-pandemic period, thus contributing to exacerbate science denial and belief in conspiracy theories. At the same time, however, they confirm the efficacy of assiduously proposing a convincing counter-narrative to misinformation spread. Indeed, effectiveness of vaccination turns out to be the least engaging topic discussed by misinformation during the pandemic period, when compared to other polarising arguments such as safety concerns, legal issues and vaccine business. By highlighting the strengths and weaknesses of institutional and mainstream communication, our findings can be a valuable asset for improving and better targeting campaigns against misinformation on vaccines.