CASE No. 29

CHARLES S. MINNICK, son of S. V. Minnick, Carthage, N. Y.

Age 6.

Vaccinated Oct. 6.

Commenced to complain Oct. 16,--10 days from vaccination.

Recovered.

Diagnosis, “Vaccination.”

The first unfavorable symptom was kidney trouble. He was

_unconscious and helpless for two weeks_. Breathing labored.

Is recovering slightly crippled. This also seems to be a

transparent case of infantile paralysis. These three cases in

the same house, with identical symptoms, following vaccination

in exactly the same period of time, furnish the most damaging

evidence against vaccine that has been brought to light in the

present investigation.

MR. LOYSTER’S ARGUMENT AND PROOF THAT INFANTILE PARALYSIS IS CAUSED BY

VACCINATION

The theory of the possibility of conveying infantile paralysis through

vaccine abrasions as well as the probability of the vaccine having

contained the germs receives startling confirmation in three cases in

the home of S. V. Minnick of Carthage, reported under numbers 27, 28,

and 29. Ruth, 10½, and Hobart, 13, were vaccinated the same day _from

the same tube of virus_. Both became very sick in just ten days from

vaccination. The boy, being older, recovered, after a severe illness,

with symptoms much like the girl. Ruth died after a plain case of

infantile paralysis, which was so reported by her attending physician.

Four days before the little girl’s death, in compliance with the

demand of the school authorities, the little brother, Charles, age 6,

was vaccinated. In precisely 10 days he, also, became very sick, with

symptoms practically identical with the other two children. He was

_unconscious and helpless_ for two weeks, but recovered with a slight

residual paralysis. He was attended by another physician and the only

diagnosis reported is “vaccination.”

Simultaneous cases of infantile paralysis in the same family have

hitherto been so rare as to excite comment. Many physicians with large

practice have never had an instance in their entire practice. Here are

_three_ in one house.

The theory of “subsequent infection” needs extensive “bracing” in this

instance; and then there is Case 19 with onset in 12 days; Case 24,

onset in 11 days; Case 25, onset in 11 days; unquestionably paralysis

cases, with practically identical incubation periods, all contributing

evidence of a common and simultaneous infection. What other possible

common origin except the vaccine virus is it possible to place under

suspicion? It is unthinkable that these children, widely scattered

in different portions of the State, with no history of near-by

paralysis cases, could have each accidentally acquired the germ in the

vaccination wound exactly ten or eleven days from vaccination. Such a

theory presupposes a universal distribution of the poliomyelitis germ

entirely at variance with observation and experience.

* * * * *

_Note._ Vaccination is acknowledged to be one of the causes

of Infantile Paralysis by a recent medical authority on this

subject, Dr. Oskar Vulpius, in a book published by Wm. Wood &

Company of New York, 1912.--C. M. H.

Horrors of vaccination exposed and illustrated · 第 105 / 119 题