The article on Vaccination in the Encyclopedia Britannica, in the old
edition preceding the last or current edition, was written by Dr.
Chas. Creighton of London, a well known English doctor who, by long
study, has become an opponent of vaccination, and is the author of
several books exposing its fallacies. When Dr. Creighton first got
the commission to write the article for the Encyclopedia he was a
pro-vaccinist, like many other doctors, but to fit himself to write
a full and impartial article which would give both sides of the
subject he resolved to make a thorough study of it, pro and con. This
study convinced him of the dangerous nature of vaccination to health
and life, its limited or exaggerated value as a protection against
smallpox, and its illogical or unscientific basis as a medical remedy;
and his critical article on this subject, when it first appeared in the
leading Encyclopedia, made a sensation in the medical world and has
been a thorn in the side of pro-vaccinists ever since.
Now, what will impartial students of this subject say when I cite the
fact that the article on Vaccination in the last or current edition
of the Britannica is written, not by a man who is impartial and
professionally disinterested in the subject, as was Dr. Creighton,
and who tried to give both sides of the subject freely, but, on the
contrary, by a man who is actually _a manufacturer or inventor of
vaccine virus_ and has, therefore, necessarily, a professional interest
and bias to conceal the failures and dangers of vaccination as far
as he can? Surely, the editors of the Britannica made a great moral
and logical mistake when they selected any man to write so important
an article on a much disputed subject in this great book of reference
who had any professional or other interest or bias in this subject.
Now, the biased and interested author of this article in the last
edition is none other than Dr. S. Monckton Copeman of London, a strong
pro-vaccinist, who claims to be the original inventor of the so-called
“_glycerinated virus_” now in general use for vaccination. The idea of
adding glycerine to the virus is to kill the many dangerous disease
germs or infections it is known to contain, but to preserve the germ
of smallpox, or “cowpox” intact. This is, of course, an admission that
before the use of glycerinated virus vaccination was very dangerous
and likely to cause many infections in the human body, but since the
adoption of glycerinated virus--Dr. Copeman’s invention--it is now
claimed that vaccination is rendered safe and harmless. This is, of
course, a false claim, as I have already shown, and will further show
in a succeeding paragraph.
Now, this greatly biased and one-sided article of Dr. Copeman--the
maker or inventor of glycerinated virus--in our greatest Encyclopedia,
is surely a good illustration of my charge that the trusting public
mind is constantly misled, whether intentionally or unintentionally
I know not, by some of our highest medical authorities on the
whole subject of vaccination, and particularly as to its alleged
harmlessness. Thus, when Dr. Copeman, who is regarded as one of the
leading authorities on modern vaccination, comes to consider the
dangers of vaccination, he heads his paragraph, “Alleged Injurious
Effects,” thus implying that the injuries are only “alleged” and not
real, and he goes on to argue or imply that--due to his invention--the
dangers and injuries are now trifling or negligible, but tacitly admits
or implies that before his invention of glycerinated virus the dangers
were very serious, whereas, with his invention, vaccination is now
practically safe and harmless.
Now, what must we think of the truth of this claim that vaccination
with glycerinated virus is now safe and harmless, when, at the very
time that its inventor made or implied this claim in the pages of the
Encyclopedia, in the year 1910 or 1911, the vital records of his own
country, in the reports of the Registrar General of England for those
two years, showed that there were eight deaths from vaccination in the
year 1910, and fourteen deaths from vaccination in 1911! And these
fatal vaccinations were, of course, all made with the glycerinated
virus as, practically, no other kind is now used! These vaccination
deaths were all in little children under five years and they exceeded
the deaths from smallpox in the same age class by fourfold in 1910 and
by threefold in 1911! That is, the deaths from vaccination under five
years were eight in 1910 and fourteen in 1911; while the deaths from
smallpox under five years were two in 1910 and five in 1911! The total
deaths from smallpox in all ages were nineteen in 1910 and twenty-three
in 1911.
The four years preceding 1910 show even a worse record for vaccinal
mortality than the record of 1910 and 1911, so that the record of
those two years cannot be claimed as anything special or unusual.
For example, the reports of the Registrar General for 1906, 1907
and 1908 show a total of only six deaths for these three years
from smallpox in the infant ages under five years--the ages most
susceptible to smallpox--while for the same infant ages there is a
total of fifty-three deaths for the same three years from cowpox or
vaccination--nine times more infant deaths from vaccination than from
smallpox! In 1909 there is reported only one infant death from smallpox
and eleven infant deaths from vaccination!
This shocking record of vaccination deaths clearly shows that the
famous glycerinated vaccination of Dr. Copeman, which he virtually
claims to be so safe and harmless, in our greatest book of public
reference, is actually from three to ten times more fatal to children
than natural smallpox, as proved by the vital records of his own
country and by the highest statistical authority in the world! Surely,
Mr. President, in such crushing counter facts as these, my charge
of a shocking deception of the public mind, either intentional or
unintentional, on the merits of vaccination by our highest medical and
literary authorities, is flatly proved.
THE ERRORS OF DR. M. J. ROSENAU, A HIGH MEDICAL AUTHORITY, ON THE
RELATIVE HARMLESSNESS OF VACCINATION
We now come to a different style of medical falsehood on the effects
of vaccination which, while honestly admitting its dangerous nature,
yet tries to minimize the dangers as much as possible and reduce them
to the relatively immaterial. This is a shameful equivocation of the
truth and an absurd contradiction of facts, as I will now prove out
of the mouth of the apologist himself. I now refer to the statements
of Dr. Milton J. Rosenau, who is one of our highest authorities in
this country on vaccination and other special medical subjects. He was
for several years Director of the United States Hygienic Laboratory
at Washington, where he made many investigations into the nature of
vaccine virus, its impurities, dangers, etc., and has made official
reports on different subjects for the said Laboratory and for the
United States Public Health Service. He is now professor of Preventive
Medicine and Hygiene in Harvard University, and is the author of
several books, one of which, “Preventive Medicine and Hygiene,”
published by D. Appleton & Co. in 1914, I will now quote from. In this
book, on page 19, under the head of “Dangers and Complications” of
vaccination, Dr. Rosenau states as follows:
“However, vaccination is not always a harmless procedure; it
must be looked upon as the production of an acute infectious
disease, and, although the disease is always mild and trivial,
it must not be treated as trifling. The chief danger lies in
the fact that we have produced an open wound, which is subject
to the complications of any wound. Even a pin prick or a razor
scratch may result in death. While the aggregate number of
deaths resulting from the complications of vaccination may be
considerable, the aggregate of the individual risk is so small
as to be disregarded, especially when proper precautions are
taken.”
Here, surely, are some honest admissions and some queer denials, and
I would now kindly ask you, Mr. President, to re-read this quotation
carefully, and I think you will find it an interesting verbal and
psychological study, showing the typical sophistry and casuistry of
the whole vaccination cult which well illustrates a witty saying of
the late Elbert Hubbard, who was a great student and opponent of
vaccination, viz.: “The great trouble with vaccination is that it
vaccinates the mind.” And he meant by this that the poison which the
vaccinators put into the blood of their victims seems to react morally
on themselves so that it poisons and blinds their minds and renders
them unable to see their own shocking absurdities and mendacities in
their false excuses and defences for the serious evils of vaccination.
The great Gladstone was reported to have said that he was led to
oppose compulsory vaccination not so much by the arguments of the
anti-vaccinists as from the falsehoods of the vaccinators.
You will note that all the medical authorities previously quoted assert
positively that vaccination is perfectly safe and harmless and never
causes any serious injury or death, except what might be due to the
carelessness of the vaccinated persons themselves, which statement I
have proved by overwhelming evidence to be a most outrageous medical
falsehood. Per contra, the last medical authority quoted honestly
admits that vaccination is not always harmless and that it always
consists in inflicting an acute infectious disease on the human body,
but that this inflicted disease practically never does any harm and may
be disregarded. In other words, the policy of this medical authority
and high representative of the vaccination cult, in the statement
quoted, seems to be to honestly admit all he dare, and gracefully deny
all he can! And for this honesty we must give him a layman’s thanks,
for he does really admit a great deal, and where he attempts to deny he
really admits more, as I will soon show.
Now, it is obvious that the infliction of “an acute infectious
disease,” deliberately and extensively, on the human body, is a
vicious and dangerous practice, per se and prima facie, and cannot
be continued indefinitely without serious injuries, as I have already
proved, and hence Dr. Rosenau contradicts himself at the very outset
in his statement or apology for vaccination. In his next phrase he
makes the still more surprising statement that this inflicted disease
is “_always mild and trivial_,” which assertion is undoubtedly a
falsehood! And Dr. Rosenau must know as well as any doctor or layman
in this country that this assertion is false, and per contra that this
inflicted disease--vaccination--is sometimes very severe and fatal and
far worse than natural smallpox itself, and that it often causes more
annual deaths than smallpox, as I have already proved by overwhelming
evidence and by the highest statistical records in the world! I would,
therefore, here respectfully suggest that Dr. Rosenau make some
apology to his readers for this falsehood or mistake, and correct this
statement as soon as possible in the next edition of his book.
To emphasize and dispose of this serious error of Dr. Rosenau I will
now show out of his own mouth how he stultifies and contradicts
himself, and logically admits that vaccination is not “always mild and
trivial,” but is often quite dangerous and fatal. For example, he says:
“And although the disease is always mild and trivial, yet it
must not be treated as trifling.”
This phrase, just quoted, is, surely, a rich verbal and logical study
of medical sophistry and equivocation. Vaccination, this medical
champion tells us, is always a “trivial” disease, but it is not a
“trifling” disease. This is morally and logically equivalent to
telling us that vaccination _is trivial_ and it _is not trivial_! In
other words, he asserts in one breath what he denies in the next, or
contradicts himself in successive breaths! This is so, because the
dictionaries show that the two words “trifling” and “trivial” have
exactly the same meaning and are synonymous and identical, so that
“trivial” is defined as “trifling,” and “trifling” is defined as
“trivial.” This, therefore, morally and logically, means a confession
out of his own mouth that the inflicted disease, vaccination, is not
always either trivial or trifling, but is often very dangerous and
deadly, which is, of course, the exact and demonstrable truth, and the
scholarly Dr. Rosenau is the last man who can plead ignorance of this
truth. Indeed, in another paragraph of his contradictory statement,
he absolutely acknowledges this serious danger of vaccination while
apparently trying to conceal or deny it. For example, he makes this
conclusive and crushing admission that:
“While the aggregate number of deaths resulting from the
complications of vaccination may be considerable, the aggregate
of the individual risk is so small as to be disregarded.”
Now, if the aggregate number of deaths from vaccination is
“_considerable_,” then it is clearly proved, out of his own mouth,
that vaccination is not always mild or trivial, but just the opposite,
viz., _frequently very dangerous and deadly_, thus again proving the
case against vaccination out of the mouth of its own defenders! As to
the quibble or sophistry that “_the aggregate of the individual risk is
so small as to be disregarded_,” this is also a fallacy and falsehood,
because this cannot be really true if the aggregate number of deaths
is so “considerable,” and particularly not when we have shown that the
deaths from vaccination frequently exceed the deaths from smallpox, as
this proves that the individual risk from general vaccination is far
greater than from natural smallpox, and, therefore, in the long run,
vaccination is as much to be avoided as smallpox if not more so.
Webster’s Dictionary gives three meanings for “Considerable,” as
follows: “Worthy of consideration”; “notable”; “rather large in amount.”
The Comprehensive Standard Dictionary gives the meaning of
“Considerable” as: “Of noteworthy size, quantity or importance.”
It will therefore be seen that Dr. Rosenau, necessarily and logically,
admits that the deaths and injuries from vaccination are not “trivial”
but “rather large in amount,” and “of noteworthy size, quantity or
importance,” thus proving our case out of the mouth of our opponents.
JENNER’S GREAT FALSEHOODS. THE ORIGINAL MENDACITIES OF VACCINATION
EXPOSED
No chapter on the mendacities of vaccination would be complete without
including the great foundation and monumental falsehoods of Dr. Edward
Jenner, who was the alleged “discoverer” or inventor of “Vaccination,”
by which term is meant the inoculation of cowpox from cow to man and
thence from arm to arm, in distinction from the old direct smallpox
inoculation from human to human; and it may now be interesting and
profitable to devote a few paragraphs to these great falsehoods of the
arch-vaccinator himself.
Jenner’s original claims for vaccination were stated, positively, in
his Petition to Parliament March 17, 1802, asking for a reward for his
alleged “discovery” in these words:
“That _your petitioner, having discovered_ that a disease which
occasionally exists in a particular form among cattle, known
by the name of the cowpox, admits of being inoculated on the
human frame with the _most perfect ease_ and _safety_, and is
attended with the singularly beneficial effect of _rendering
through life_ the person so inoculated _perfectly secure from
the infection of the smallpox_.”--See “History and Pathology of
Vaccination,” by Dr. Edgar M. Crookshank, London, 1889, page
173, Vol. I.
Now, every proposition in the above statement is a shocking falsehood,
as can be easily proved by a few moments’ consideration. In the above
quotation the emphasis is mine but the words are Jenner’s, and I
have emphasized the words to show clearly where the rank and glaring
falsehoods are which make this short statement a very tissue of
falsehoods, as will soon appear.
In the first place, it was a downright falsehood for Jenner to claim
that he had “_discovered_” that a disease known as “cowpox” could be
inoculated on the human frame and that this inoculation would act as
a preventive of smallpox, for it is obvious to every student of the
history of vaccination that Jenner made no such original “discovery,”
but that this “discovery” was made by the milkmaids and dairy farmers
of rural England who had long known and used it, and this “discovery”
was given by them to Jenner, who then falsely claimed it as his own
“discovery” and finally got a reward of thirty thousand pounds from
Parliament for this false claim!
Thus does History show us that vaccination commenced, at its very
outset, with gross falsehood and also in what would be called in our
day a gigantic piece of medical “graft,” and it has been continued on a
similar basis, more or less, ever since.
The second great falsehood in the original claim of Jenner was the
shocking and reckless statement that the cowpox was perfectly harmless
and could be inoculated on the human body with “_perfect safety_,”
which false claim has been kept up ever since by the mendacious
successors of Jenner, as I have already shown. This claim of the
“_perfect safety_” of cowpox was, of course, _perfectly false_, for
not only were some of Jenner’s own experiments and tests on patients
harmful, but his whole scheme of arm-to-arm vaccination was soon proved
to be so dangerous that it was long ago abandoned and prohibited like
its evil predecessor--smallpox inoculation--and, for that reason,
is not used to-day, being replaced by what is known as “Bovine
Vaccination,” which is direct inoculation of so-called “cowpox” from
cattle to man instead of from man to man or arm to arm as used by
Jenner. Now, this modern “Bovine” vaccination I believe to be even more
dangerous than the old Jennerian arm-to-arm type, because it involves
the extensive diseasing of two classes of animals, cattle and mankind,
and has been the cause of deadly epidemics in both classes, as already
proved, which was not known under the old system, and it is also guilty
of now causing more deaths almost every year than natural smallpox
itself, particularly among little children, as I have already proved
beyond question.
The third great falsehood in this tissue of Jennerian mendacity is the
claim that one vaccination rendered the vaccinated person “_perfectly
secure_” “_through life_” from “_the infection of the smallpox_.” This
was, of course, a most reckless and absurd claim on its face, for how
could Jenner, with a few experiments and tests extending over a few
years, declare with any honesty, or with any logical or scientific
warrant, that cowpox inoculation gave _absolute security from smallpox
for life_? This reckless claim was, of course, soon proved to be a
rank falsehood by the wide-spread failure of vaccination to protect
from smallpox as soon as the vaccinated persons were exposed to actual
infection or epidemic conditions where they readily contracted the
disease, as they do to this day notwithstanding their vaccination! A
new apology had therefore to be invented for this wholesale failure
of vaccination soon after its first adoption, and this was made by
abandoning the false claim of unlimited life protection from one
vaccination and substituting the modified claim of a limited protection
for seven years--more or less--and the consequent necessity of frequent
or periodical re-vaccinations to get any continued or reliable
protection from the operation.
Now Jenner’s original false and absurd claim of unlimited or life
protection from one vaccination was probably partly due to his
ignorance of the real nature and history of smallpox and his credulous
adoption of the old fallacy and superstition, in common use, that one
attack of smallpox gave sure immunity for life from a second attack,
which proposition never really had any scientific basis in theory or
fact, as it has been repeatedly proved that smallpox may, and often
does, occur two or three times in the same person, whether vaccinated
or unvaccinated, and that there is no regularity or certainty in the
alleged protection given either by smallpox or vaccination, but that
immunity depends largely on sanitary, hygienic and constitutional
conditions. In fact, some students seem to think that the person who
has once had smallpox is more likely to have it again than one who has
never had the disease! It was, therefore, at this first demonstrated
failure of vaccination to protect from smallpox that Jenner’s chief
assistant, Dr. James Moore, wrote a very interesting little book called
“The History of Small Pox,” London, 1815. The chief purpose of this
book was to apologize for the failure of vaccination to protect from
smallpox, as originally falsely claimed by Jenner, by showing that
even smallpox does not protect with certainty for life or any other
period, but that the same person may have smallpox two or three times
in succession, instances of which are cited all through the book, thus
making the ingenious or crafty plea for vaccination that it cannot be
expected to give any more protection than smallpox gives; and therefore
reliance must not be placed on one vaccination alone for life, but
protection can only be obtained by re-vaccinations repeated at frequent
intervals of a few years!
It will thus be seen that Jenner completely abandoned his false and
reckless claim of _perfect protection_ from smallpox _for life_ by
_one vaccination_, for which he got his big graft or money prize from
the English government; but, please note, he did not make this retreat
or acknowledge his great mistake until after he had pocketed his big
reward of thirty thousand pounds for his shamefully false claim of the
unlimited protection and perfect safety of vaccination!
SHORT DURATION OF VACCINAL PROTECTION AND NECESSITY OF FREQUENT
RE-VACCINATIONS NOW ADMITTED. DANGER FROM SUCH REPEATED VACCINATIONS
GREATER THAN FROM SMALLPOX
We have seen in the preceding chapter how the original false and
reckless claim of Dr. Jenner for _absolute protection for life from
one vaccination_ was soon abandoned when put to the actual test of
smallpox epidemics and that a modified position was then taken in the
necessity of re-vaccination in certain periods of about seven years,
more or less. This limited claim has, however, been also abandoned
in recent years and the term of alleged vaccinal protection has been
getting successively shorter and shorter, until it has now fallen
to the ridiculously short protective period of only six months or a
year for each vaccination or re-vaccination! This seems to be the
present position of our most recent medical authorities and advanced
vaccinators, which is not only a great shrinkage in protective claim
but is very interesting and significant in that it closely approaches,
and admits, the rational position of the anti-vaccinators who have
contended consistently and persistently from the days of Jenner that
vaccination, at the best, gave merely a limited immunity of only a few
months, more or less, and, in some cases, in very susceptible persons,
gave no immunity; and that frequent and repeated vaccinations are more
dangerous as being multiple and cumulative infections of an artificial
or inflicted disease than beneficial as the preventive of a natural
disease.
To show the present position of advanced pro-vaccinators on this point
and their virtual agreement with anti-vaccinators as to the very
limited period of vaccinal protection and the necessity of frequent
repetitions, I will now quote from a recent high medical authority,
viz., Dr. Robert Olesen, of the U. S. Public Health Service, stationed
at Manila in the Philippine Islands, which is supposed to be one of the
greatest fields in the world for practical experience with smallpox and
vaccination.
In an elaborate article by Dr. Olesen printed in the _New York Medical
Record_ of March 4, 1911, he makes these very serious statements as to
the necessity of frequent re-vaccinations and the short duration of
protection from each vaccination, as follows:
“THE NECESSITY FOR RE-VACCINATION.--There is abundant reason
for believing that a person who has been successfully
vaccinated is absolutely protected against smallpox during
a period varying from six to twelve months, probably the
latter. After this time his immunity may or may not continue
indefinitely....
“In the absence of means of determining accurately the length
of perfect resistance it is best to re-vaccinate once a year.”
Now here we plainly see that this Government Expert after long
experience in the fertile field of the Philippines admits clearly and
positively the very limited protective power of vaccination, so that
it is practically evanescent in duration, or extends over a few months
only, or at most can not, or should not, be relied on for sure and
safe protection longer than from six months to one year! And for this
reason Dr. Olesen carefully advises that “_it is best to re-vaccinate
once a year_.”
Now, surely, this modest position of Dr. Olesen as to the short
duration of protection and the necessity of re-vaccination _once a
year_ is very similar to the position of the anti-vaccinators, but very
different from the positive claim of Dr. Jenner on which vaccination
started and for which he got his big prize or “graft” of thirty
thousand pounds for the grossly false claim of his alleged “discovery”
that _one vaccination_ would give _absolute protection_ from smallpox
_for life_!
THE DANGEROUS “VACCINATION CREED” OF THE CHICAGO BOARD OF HEALTH
EXPLAINED AND CONDEMNED
I will now give another great authority on vaccination, viz., the
famous and dangerous “Vaccination Creed” of the Chicago Board of
Health, issued in 1906, and still in use, which limits the protective
power of vaccination still more than Dr. Olesen and makes it absolutely
dependent on multiple or doubly repeated vaccinations to the point of
“saturation,” as follows:
“After many years of experience with smallpox and vaccination,
the Chicago Department of Health hereby declares:
“First: That true vaccination--repeated until it no longer
takes--ALWAYS prevents smallpox. NOTHING ELSE DOES.”
It may be now noted that the first and essential article of this
creed, printed with its big emphatic capitals, positively states that
the only vaccination that protects against smallpox is a duplicated,
successive, repeated or multiple vaccination--“_repeated until it no
longer takes_.” This means that there must be at least two or three
successive vaccinations or multiples of them before any “protection”
is obtained, that is, at least one or more successful “takes” and one
subsequent vaccination which fails to take! In other words, we must
vaccinate repeatedly until it takes, and then vaccinate repeatedly
until it fails to take, to get any protection; and this, in some cases,
may of course require from two to four or six successive vaccinations!
And yet this is the only kind of _redoubled_ vaccination which this
famous, or infamous, creed gravely and emphatically tells us in full
and loud capitals “ALWAYS” prevents smallpox and that “NOTHING ELSE
DOES”! And while Dr. Olesen tells us that one successful vaccination,
repeated at least once every year, is a fairly reliable protection
against smallpox, yet this “Chicago Creed” positively tells us that
such “successful” yearly vaccination is no good at all unless followed
at once by another vaccination _which is not successful_! What do you
now think, Mr. President, of the absurdity and confusion in these
vaccination theories? And what do you think of the great personal
repulsiveness and great medical danger of these theories in calling for
so many and such frequent inoculations of disease virus or blood poison
to give alleged protection from the so-called dangerous disease of
smallpox which ordinarily kills less people every year than lightning
and which in an epidemic year kills less than ordinary measles or
whooping-cough kills every year?
Now while such wholesale and repeated or redoubled or saturated
vaccinations for every person, every year, would undoubtedly be a most
profitable thing for vaccinating doctors and vaccine makers and would
extend the use of vaccine virus _ten to one hundred fold_, yet it is
very doubtful whether this would be any benefit to public health.
On the contrary, this would be the most grave menace to private and
public health that could be conceived; for, whereas, the limited
vaccination now practiced actually causes more deaths per year than
smallpox, particularly in little school children, what would happen to
our precious children and our brave soldiers and sailors if we were
to adopt the horribly dangerous theories of multiple or redoubled or
“saturated” vaccination every year for each person, according to the
“Creeds” of Dr. Olesen and the Chicago Board of Health, which these
experts assure us is the only way to get any certain protection from
smallpox?
Now if only one vaccination were required for life protection, it
would, obviously, not involve as much risk from vaccinal infections
or “complications,” such as Lockjaw, Septicemia, Meningitis and
Pneumonia; but if the vaccinations have to be repeated every few
months or a year as Dr. Olesen directs, or, furthermore, if they have
to be redoubled and repeated “_until it no longer takes_,” as in the
“Chicago Creed,” then the infecting risk is obviously very different
and is so much increased with each repeated inoculation that the danger
of these repeated and cumulative infections from the artificial or
inflicted septicemic disease called “cowpox” becomes much worse than
the danger from the natural disease, smallpox, so that the patient is
thus more likely to suffer and die from the “cure” rather than from
the “disease,” as now frequently happens from vaccinations, as I have
already abundantly proved by shocking examples in these pages.