Does rabies exist? - Page 4

[MyLilPwny]

I went directly to the source of the concept that Pasteur created rabies--Bechamp Or Pasteur: A Lost Chapter in the History of Biology by Ethel Douglas Hume page 228 describes how Pasteur's hydrophobia vaccines caused paralytic hydrophobia, "the new disease brought into the world by Pasteur".

Hydrophobia is described as being caused by nerves, primarily fear. Here is a quote on page 222-223:

The avoidance of fear is, therefore, the main essential of safety after a dog-bite, and the very slight amount of risk may be realised by thousand of innocuous bites received by veterinary surgeons and others in the habit of constantly handling animals. Occasionally there may be a victim to a bite in the same way that deaths have been known to occur after pin-pricks and stings of insects, while scratches and wounds sometimes bring about tetanus, of which complaint hydrophobia appears to be a variety.

On page 231 it describes how Dr. George Wilson documented in Reservation Memorandum of the Royal Commission on Vivisection in his own words that "Pasteur carefully screened his statistics, after some untoward deaths had occurred during treatment or immediately after by ruling that all deaths should be excluded from the statistical returns which occurred either during treatment or within fifteen days of the last injection..."

In the Report on the Kasauli Institute for 1910, the statistics were 2,073 persons that were bitten or licked by rabid or "suspected" rabid animals. Of this, there were 26 deaths from hydrophobia, but 14 died during Pasteur's hydrophobia vaccines treatment---however, only 4 are accounted for as "failures" for Pasteur's vaccine, obviously screening statistics.

[LAWoman]

I have to admit to being totally confused by that text. So the theory offered is that rabies symptoms are caused by fear? Or a real infection is exacerbated by fear? Or fear in conjunction with the vaccine cause rabies symptoms? Is that what it says or am I misreading?

How would that theory explain deaths from rabies where no vaccine was ever given? Or how would it explain why 95% of rabies deaths are in areas where the infection is endemic. Are the 55,000 people in Africa and Asia who die of rabies infection every year more fearful and nervous than the American's and Europeans who get bitten by domestic animals every year? What am I missing?

[Otto]

Originally Posted by LAWoman

I have to admit to being totally confused by that text. So the theory offered is that rabies symptoms are caused by fear? Or a real infection is exacerbated by fear?

It seems to be the former.

Various instances have been recorded of cases unquestionably brought on by suggestion. For example, two young Frenchmen were bitten at Havre by the same dog in January, 1853. One died from the effects within a month, but before this the other young man had sailed for America, where he lived for 15 years in total ignorance of the end of his former companion. In September, 1868, he returned to France and heard of the tragedy, and actually then himself developed symptoms and within three weeks was dead of hydrophobia.

Page 222, ibid.

[Pepper44]

Originally Posted by rayo de sol

I thought only mammals got rabies?



BUT the choices aren't only getting the rabies vaccine or dying of rabies!

You're assuming that rabies has a 100 percent transmission rate, that every time a rabid animal bites another mammal, that the bitten mammal then develops the disease.

Does anyone know what the transmission rate for rabies is?

My guess would be that it's pretty low, especially if you scrub the wound well afterward.

I wasn't testing for rabies in the chicken. Everytime I have an unexplained death I get the bird a necropsy to check for disease. Chickens can get a lot of different diseases/viruses from wild birds or passed from other diseased chickens.

[MaterPrimaePuellae]

Originally Posted by cravenab00

i do not vaccinate, and never will. But i will say that rabies is the only vaccine i would ever consider. rabies is NOT treatable. if we catch whooping cough, measles, or even tetanus, they are treatable. rabies, is absolutley NOT.
for the most part, wild animals that are often rabid will stay far from humans. we live in an area where racoons, skunks, foxes, coyotes, and even bobcats are seen relatively often.
(warning: what i am about to say may offend someone)
If myself or one of my children were bitten by a wild animal, i would get the gun, and kill it, and have it tested. and would have no guilt in doing so. no animal is more important than my babies. if it was found to be rabid, i would do the shots. I would HATE IT. but it is better than death.
we had bats in our attic last year and i was absolutely beside myself with worry about rabies, so i did a ton of research.
I agree that whale to is not a good site for research. but the CDC isnt either.
by the way, rabies is the only vaccine we give our cats.

I ABSOLUTELY, 100% agree w/ the bolded portion. I would be shocked that anyone would disagree with this?

Originally Posted by MCatLvrMom2A&X

It is absolutely real and deadly. That is one vax I would do in a heartbeat if I or any of my family was bitten by even a suspected rabid animal. I have seen video's on tv or rabid animals it isnt pretty.

Did anyone hear the story on This American Life a couple of years ago about the woman who was attacked by a rabid raccoon while taking a walk up her driveway? It attacked her, completely unprovoked. She was wearing a puffy, thick coat, which was the only reason it didn't cause very extenstive damage. Her huband and adult sons came to her rescue and basically had to club the raccoon to death. It is a very scary story. The raccoon was tested, and she did get the vax series (though she had to basically DEMAND it, and ER staff gave her misinformation about how soon she needed the series)

Originally Posted by alegna

FWIW that's one of the cases it is unlikely I would vax. Domestic pets are unlikely carriers. Especially if it was still living as a pet, it's *incredibly* unlikely it was rabid. It being a stray years before has absolutely NO bearing- no way it could have had rabies for years.

-Angela

I agree. In the rabid raccoon case, I would get the series. In the domestic animal acting weird case... probably not. I was supervising a group of teenage girls once, and one picked up a tiny (like, 4 week old) kitten who nipped her on the finger. Her mother rushed her off for the rabies vaccine.... that would not have been my choice!

ETA: I definitely vaccinate our animals for rabies. I feel very differently about the risk/benefit analysis when I'm talking about animals vs. people.

[Otto]

Originally Posted by MaterPrimaePuellae

Did anyone hear the story on This American Life a couple of years ago about the woman who was attacked by a rabid raccoon while taking a walk up her driveway?

This? (Starts about five minutes into the "full episode" link.)

[BeckyBird]

"I agree that whale to is not a good site for research. but the CDC isnt either."

Lol cravenab00, that is funny!

[aniT]

Originally Posted by MaterPrimaePuellae

ETA: I definitely vaccinate our animals for rabies. I feel very differently about the risk/benefit analysis when I'm talking about animals vs. people.

You know, the only cats I have had vaccinated for rabies were the cats we had when we lived adjacent to a national forest. In town.. I have never had those cats vaccinated.

[marybethorama]

Originally Posted by Cristiaz

The problem I have with arguing any vaccine topic is that we all read and site different sources so everyone believes they are right. What's the point? Should not have posted my opinion. Half the stuff I read in replies regarding vaccines, I think is absurd...however we are all entitled to our opinions and we are entitled to believe in our sources. Which is why I don't tell people their opinions are absurd. Thanks.

There is such thing as CREDIBLE sources. HTH

[Emmeline II]

Originally Posted by mamajama

Someone asked what is wrong with *********. Aside from the fact that it contains an infinite amount of paranoid drivel, it also contains anti-semitic propanganda including revisionist history declaring that the holocaust never happened. I am adding the link not to promote this garbage but to answer a question posed by a previous poster. http://www.*********/b/holocaust_revisionism.html

Would you really truly take anything seriously supported by a site that would support this kind of hate speech?

Not without investigating the sources they site or investigating uncited posting. Whaleto does repost things found elsewhere. I don't take what Whaleto or Mercola says at face value; I always check elsewhere.