or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Baby › Baby Health › Vaccinations › Vaccinations Debate › Vaccination: A Mythical History
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Vaccination: A Mythical History - Page 5

post #81 of 141

It's also worth mentioning that Sydenham practiced well before small pox vaccination was introduced.  So when we compare his treatment to contemporaries, we're not comparing vaccinated patients to non-vaccinated patients.

post #82 of 141

Oh my goodness, I am doing so much geeking out with this stuff!  I'm looking up the historical use of acids in treating diseases now. 

 

I tracked down the Cleveland Journal of Medicine, which contained this quote mentioned in the article BeckyBird linked to: “Any person who has been exposed need have no fear of smallpox if he will take two or three tablespoonfuls of pure cider vinegar three or four times a day.” The discussion may now be regarded as closed, and smallpox at last is conquered!"  At that time they did attribute the cure to the acetic acid in the vinegar.  I'm not sure if it was given credit earlier in history.  For some reason the acid in ACV is considered superior to that in other vinegars.  In another of the references in Becky's article, it's claimed to be better because alcohol is added to other vinegars.

 

Anyway, here is the link to the CJM if anyone is interested: http://tinyurl.com/ksce8ms  And here is a link to the Critique, which contained Dr. Howe's ACV cure: http://tinyurl.com/ljo57bd

 

But in the same copy of the CJM, I found this article on smallpox vaccination: http://tinyurl.com/ke373wl It's worth noting that authors consider smallpox to be extremely serious.  More interesting to me, they also have some criticisms of the claims that Leicester was able to prevent smallpox without vaccinating.  Apparently the hospital was outside city limits.  Leicester residents who contracted smallpox were moved to the hospital and if they died there, the deaths were not attributed to the city.  They also claim that if you look at hospital records in 1892, among patients from Leicester there were 2 vaccinated children under 10 who got smallpox with 0 deaths and 105 unvaccinated children who got smallpox with 15 deaths.

post #83 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by cwill View Post
 

Oh my goodness, I am doing so much geeking out with this stuff!  I'm looking up the historical use of acids in treating diseases now. 

 

I tracked down the Cleveland Journal of Medicine, which contained this quote mentioned in the article BeckyBird linked to: “Any person who has been exposed need have no fear of smallpox if he will take two or three tablespoonfuls of pure cider vinegar three or four times a day.” The discussion may now be regarded as closed, and smallpox at last is conquered!"  At that time they did attribute the cure to the acetic acid in the vinegar.  I'm not sure if it was given credit earlier in history.  For some reason the acid in ACV is considered superior to that in other vinegars.  In another of the references in Becky's article, it's claimed to be better because alcohol is added to other vinegars.

 

Anyway, here is the link to the CJM if anyone is interested: http://tinyurl.com/ksce8ms  And here is a link to the Critique, which contained Dr. Howe's ACV cure: http://tinyurl.com/ljo57bd

 

But in the same copy of the CJM, I found this article on smallpox vaccination: http://tinyurl.com/ke373wl It's worth noting that authors consider smallpox to be extremely serious.  More interesting to me, they also have some criticisms of the claims that Leicester was able to prevent smallpox without vaccinating.  Apparently the hospital was outside city limits.  Leicester residents who contracted smallpox were moved to the hospital and if they died there, the deaths were not attributed to the city.  They also claim that if you look at hospital records in 1892, among patients from Leicester there were 2 vaccinated children under 10 who got smallpox with 0 deaths and 105 unvaccinated children who got smallpox with 15 deaths.

 

Thank you for finding all that! So interesting!  I love the link on the effect  they noticed vaccination had on smallpox (of course) .  

 

"Smallpox is one of the most hideous and horrible diseases known to mankind, as well as one of the most fatal.  Yet I saw this epidemic stamped out by vaccination after the death rate had reached 253 in a single month. Smallpox simply cannot live in a well-vaccinated community.  So that when a person who has been vaccinated refuses to have smallpox... we are justified in assuming that the vaccine has protected him.  When such an instance is multiplied the assumption becomes scientific certainty.  Those who oppose vaccination wish us to retrace the steps of progress and civilization, and return to the dark ages and heathenism."   :thumb 


Edited by teacozy - 10/15/13 at 4:57pm
post #84 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by teacozy View Post
 

 

  Those who oppose vaccination wish us to retrace the steps of progress and civilization, and return to the dark ages and heathenism."   :thumb 

Did you hear, non-vaxxers?  We are heathens!

 

:treehugger

post #85 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by kathymuggle View Post
 

Did you hear, non-vaxxers?  We are heathens!

 

:treehugger

And a damn proud one, at that!  Bring on the normal ways to sustain life & health! 

 

Sus

post #86 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by teacozy View Post
 

 

   

 

  "Those who oppose vaccination wish us to retrace the steps of progress and civilization, and return to the dark ages and heathenism."   :thumb 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by kathymuggle View Post
 

Did you hear, non-vaxxers?  We are heathens!

 

:treehugger

Oh, we get the message, loud and clear.  


It's amazing how, even today, people rush to judge those who....who what?  Who doubt the snake oil SOLD (for profit) by others, even though they promise us it will cure us/prevent disease/protect our children from death?  Or is it just a question of doubting the will of the majority--who seem to think that they hold jurisdiction over others' bodies?  Either way, human beings have a long, sordid history of vilifying those who don't want to go along with someone else's power play.

 

You know, since, teacozy brought up the smallpox vaccine, I did a little searching, and found these:

 

http://www.nvic.org/nvic-archives/newsletter/forcedvaccination.aspx

"The old live vaccinia virus vaccine for smallpox was never tested for safety or efficacy in controlled trials prior to mandates19,20 and it may have caused more reactions, injuries and deaths than any vaccine ever used by humans on a mass basis. Those recently vaccinated become infected with vaccinia virus and can transmit the virus to others, leading to injury and death for some.13,20,21,22,23,24,25 Unless the old vaccine for smallpox or a newly formulated vaccine is fully tested for safety and efficacy before being released for public use, legally and ethically the vaccine would have to be considered experimental and the mandated use of it a state-enforced national scientific experiment."

 

http://www.ph.ucla.edu/epi/bioter/uglysideeffsmallpoxvac.html

"There is no vaccine with comparable risks," says Paul Offit, chief of the infectious-diseases section of the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia. He is also a member of an advisory committee to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which has posted decades-old photos on its Web site of babies and children with inflamed skin lesions (http://phil.cdc.gov/Phil/search.asp). "I would never give that vaccine to my children because right now there is no disease out there," he says.

 

It actually gets more disturbing. NVIC's website states, "The old live vaccinia virus vaccine for smallpox was never tested for safety or efficacy in controlled trials prior to mandates19,20 and it may have caused more reactions, injuries and deaths than any vaccine ever used by humans on a mass basis. Those recently vaccinated become infected with vaccinia virus and can transmit the virus to others, leading to injury and death for some.13,20,21,22,23,24,25 Unless the old vaccine for smallpox or a newly formulated vaccine is fully tested for safety and efficacy before being released for public use, legally and ethically the vaccine would have to be considered experimental and the mandated use of it a state-enforced national scientific experiment."

post #87 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by kathymuggle View Post
 

Did you hear, non-vaxxers?  We are heathens!

 

:treehugger

 

One of the things that has jumped out at me, looking at all these historic accounts, is how similar the rhetoric on both sides was then and now.  Of course, now it's the pro-vaxxers who have replaced God with Science, but same old back and forth.  The article I linked to definitely reminds me of reading Science Based Medicine.

 

Also, the fact that the argument regarding the Leicester smallpox epidemic was going on 112 years ago makes me profoundly glad that I don't debate vaccines anymore.  :p

post #88 of 141
God has only been replaced by science in the sense of, instead of going to the end of our understanding and saying "everything from here on out is a Mystery of Faith", we use the scientific method to try to figure things out, Science is a way of knowing.

Taxi, that vaccine was an ugly one for sure, particularly when compared to the vaccines we have today with such incredibly low adverse effect rates. But the fact is, it helped eradicate smallpox. That is AMAZING and, I think, pretty wonderful. Look up the mortality info on vaccine-associated "modified smallpox". Very rarely "if ever" fatal.

http://web.archive.org/web/20100409144819/http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pubs/pinkbook/downloads/smallpox.pdf
post #89 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katie8681 View Post

God has only been replaced by science in the sense of, instead of going to the end of our understanding and saying "everything from here on out is a Mystery of Faith", we use the scientific method to try to figure things out, Science is a way of knowing.

 

Oh, I don't actually believe that science has replaced God.  I have seen others make that claim, however.  I was just comparing name-calling in 1901 to name-calling in 2013.

post #90 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by mama24-7 View Post
 

And a damn proud one, at that!  Bring on the normal ways to sustain life & health! 

 

Sus

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by kathymuggle View Post
 

Did you hear, non-vaxxers?  We are heathens!

 

:treehugger

 

ADD me proudly to that camp too! HEATHEN :joyand thrilled about it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

 

 

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by cwill View Post
 

 

Oh, I don't actually believe that science has replaced God.  I have seen others make that claim, however.

you many not actually believe it but IRL I have found far too many REALLY do feel this way

 

in all forms of "medical" not just vaccines and they are the rabid PRO that feel us (that are NOT) are out to harm their vaccinated children, throw in a big heaping dose of religion and it's a lethal cocktail-IMO, not just kool-aid but a more potent refreshment many are consuming in bucketfuls! Frankly I have seen many that are flat out drunk on this and with (as an example) "alcoholism", one usually needs to hit a bottom before they realize there is a problem - or IRL when they really have a vaccine related reaction or see it first hand in someone, that tends to change it! :W 

post #91 of 141

Yeah, Offit doesn't recommend the smallpox vaccine since there is no smallpox around anymore.  Obviously that hasn't always been the case and your chance of dying from smallpox is many many many many times higher than your chance of dying from the vaccine. Offit says 1 in a million die from the smallpox vaccine.  So it did make sense at one point. 

 

"Despite his reputation, Offit has occasionally met a vaccine he doesn’t like. In 2002, when he was still a member of the CDC’s advisory committee, the Bush administration was lobbying for a program to give the smallpox vaccine to tens of thousands of Americans. Fear of bioterrorism was rampant, and everyone voted in favor — everyone except Offit. The reason: He feared people would die. And he didn’t keep quiet about his reservations, making appearances on 60 Minutes II and The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer.

The problem with the vaccine, he said, is that “one in every million people who gets it dies.” Moreover, he said, because smallpox is visible when its victims are contagious (it is marked by open sores), outbreaks — if there ever were any — could be quickly contained, and there would be plenty of time to begin vaccinations then. A preventive vaccine, he said, “was a greater risk than the risk of smallpox.”

http://www.wired.com/magazine/2009/10/ff_waronscience/all/

See guys? He actually does care about the risk/benefit of vaccines :)  

post #92 of 141

So if the current smallpox vaccine kills, is it any surprise the vaccine credited with eradicating smallpox was the reason for so many unnecessary deaths?

post #93 of 141

What?? Smallpox killed 1 out of 3 people who got it.  The vaccine killed 1 out of a million.  I don't even know what you are talking about anymore. 

post #94 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by teacozy View Post
 

Yeah, Offit doesn't recommend the smallpox vaccine since there is no smallpox around anymore.  Obviously that hasn't always been the case and your chance of dying from smallpox is many many many many times higher than your chance of dying from the vaccine. Offit says 1 in a million die from the smallpox vaccine.  So it did make sense at one point. 

 

"Despite his reputation, Offit has occasionally met a vaccine he doesn’t like. In 2002, when he was still a member of the CDC’s advisory committee, the Bush administration was lobbying for a program to give the smallpox vaccine to tens of thousands of Americans. Fear of bioterrorism was rampant, and everyone voted in favor — everyone except Offit. The reason: He feared people would die. And he didn’t keep quiet about his reservations, making appearances on 60 Minutes II and The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer.

The problem with the vaccine, he said, is that “one in every million people who gets it dies.” Moreover, he said, because smallpox is visible when its victims are contagious (it is marked by open sores), outbreaks — if there ever were any — could be quickly contained, and there would be plenty of time to begin vaccinations then. A preventive vaccine, he said, “was a greater risk than the risk of smallpox.”

http://www.wired.com/magazine/2009/10/ff_waronscience/all/

See guys? He actually does care about the risk/benefit of vaccines :)  

I think he just didn't want to be in a position where HE would be forced to take the smallpox vaccine.

post #95 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taximom5 View Post
 
 

I think he just didn't want to be in a position where HE would be forced to take the smallpox vaccine.

 

Not to worry, we can just add it to his 10,000.

post #96 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by teacozy View Post
 

What?? Smallpox killed 1 out of 3 people who got it.  The vaccine killed 1 out of a million.  I don't even know what you are talking about anymore. 

I don't know what you are talking about either. The original smallpox vaccine only killed one in a million? Pull the other one. teacozy, you are a riot.

 

post #97 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mirzam View Post
 

I don't know what you are talking about either. The original smallpox vaccine only killed one in a million? Pull the other one. teacozy, you are a riot.

 

 

Sorry, I thought you were talking about the newer smallpox vaccine since that is the one that had been discussed in the previous post. 

 

I agree the old smallpox vaccine was much riskier. It killed about 2 out of every 100 which is really high, but the natural disease was even riskier.  I know I posted this once a while ago but I still think its interesting to look at.  This is a risk/benefit analysis for Benjamin Franklin on whether it was riskier at the time to vaccinate for smallox (the old vaccine) or take the chance of contracting it naturally.  http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2653186/  

 

It was done in part because of how guilty Franklin felt after he declined the vaccine for his son who then died from smallpox. 

 

"

“In 1736 I lost one of my sons, a fine boy of four years old, by the small-pox, taken in the common way,” he wrote. “I long regretted bitterly, and still regret that I had not given it to him by inoculation.

“This I mention for the sake of parents who omit that operation, on the supposition that they should never forgive themselves if a child died under it, my example showing that the regret may be the same either way and that, therefore, the safer should be chosen.” Benjamin Franklin  http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/01/health/01smallpox.html

 

"Franklin's decision

Decisions in medicine would be easy if they consisted of this choice: take treatment and you will live; don't and you will die. Unfortunately, Franklin's choice was not so simple. Franklin's son could die if either choice was made. If there was no risk of smallpox then “do nothing” made sense. Inoculation became a relevant option when smallpox arrived in town. The key to the decision was the probability that Franklin's son would become infected in the natural way. If this risk was high enough, then at some point inoculation with its 2% mortality would be justified." 


Edited by teacozy - 10/16/13 at 4:29pm
post #98 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taximom5 View Post
 

I think he just didn't want to be in a position where HE would be forced to take the smallpox vaccine.

 

He couldn't be forced, he's an adult.  But since he believes the risks outweigh the benefits for that particular vaccine why would he want to have it himself? 

post #99 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by teacozy View Post
 

 

He couldn't be forced, he's an adult.  But since he believes the risks outweigh the benefits for that particular vaccine why would he want to have it himself? 

 

yet we wants to FORCE others into mandatory vaccines http://articles.philly.com/2013-05-10/news/39144680_1_child-abuse-neglect-first-century-gospel

 

WITHOUT exemptions it turns into MANDATORY

 

you should do a better job at looking into what your man really feels - it's called mandatory and IMO (and that of many others!!) he doesn't just want vaccines for children! do more googling and maybe you will find he really is PUSHING for mandatory, with just an exemption for him :bgbounce 

post #100 of 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by serenbat View Post
 

 

yet we wants to FORCE others into mandatory vaccines http://articles.philly.com/2013-05-10/news/39144680_1_child-abuse-neglect-first-century-gospel

 

WITHOUT exemptions it turns into MANDATORY

 

you should do a better job at looking into what your man really feels - it's called mandatory and IMO (and that of many others!!) he doesn't just want vaccines for children! do more googling and maybe you will find he really is PUSHING for mandatory, with just an exemption for him :bgbounce 

 

While I don't agree with him on the point of removing certain exemptions, there is a difference between mandatory and compulsory vaccination.  

 

Where has he said that he thinks all adults should be forced by law to get vaccinated against their will? I'd be interested in seeing a source for that claim.  


Edited by teacozy - 10/17/13 at 7:23am
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Vaccinations Debate
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Baby › Baby Health › Vaccinations › Vaccinations Debate › Vaccination: A Mythical History