WCP5216

[1]

A Summary of the Proofs that Vaccination does not prevent Small-pox but really increases it.

I. Why Doctors are not the best Judges of the results of Vaccination. ¹

(1) In the first place they are interested parties, both pecuniarily[sic] and in a much greater degree on account of professional training and prestige. Only three years after vaccination was first introduced, on the recommendation of the heads of the profession, and their expressed conviction that it would give life-long protection against a terrible disease, parliament voted Jenner² £10,000 in 1802, and £20,000 more in 1807, besides endowing vaccination with £3000 a year in 1808. From that time doctors as a body were committed to its support; it has been taught ^{for nearly a century} as an infallible remedy in all our medical schools; and has been for the most part accepted by the public and the legislature as if it were a well established scientific principle, instead of being as the historian of epidemic diseases — Dr. Creighton³ — well terms it, a grotesque superstition.

[2]⁴

(2) Whether vaccination produces good or bad results can only be determined by its effects on a large scale. We must see whether, during epidemics ^{at different periods or in different places} as deaths from Small-pox are in ^{mortality is diminished as compared with other that from other diseases, in} proportion to the ^total amount of vaccination. in different communities or different sections of the community; and this can be done only by the Statistician using the best materials — in this country — those of our Registrar-Generals.

Two of the greatest medical authorities ^{on vaccination} — Sir John Simon⁵ and Dr. Guy F.R.S.⁶ — have declared this to be necessary. The former, in 1857 in a Parliamentary Report on the History and Practice of Vaccination, says — "From individual cases the appeal is to masses of national experience". Dr. Guy, in a celebrated paper published by the Royal Statistical Society, says — "Is vaccination a preventive of small-pox? To this question there is, there can be, no answer except such as is couched in the language of figures". The language of figures [3]⁷ is "Statistics"; and hence, statisticians, not doctors, are the only good judges of this question. But the last Royal Commission consisted wholly of doctors, lawyers, politicians and country gentlemen, — not one trained statisticialn! Hence, as I have shown demonstrated in my Vaccination a Delusion, they have made the grossest blunders and their Report is absolutely worthless.

[4]⁸

II. What is Proposed by the least Statistical evidence available.

(1) The only complete and [1 word illeg.] ^trustworthy generate records of mortality and ^of the causes of death ^which we possess, are those of the Registrar Generals for England and Wales, for Scotland, and for Ireland, the former from 1838, the ^two latter from later dates. But for London we have records from a much earlier ^{period —} date — the Bills of Mortality, which though not ^completely accurate, [1 word illeg.] are yet considered to show the rise and fall of the death-rates from the chief diseases then recognised, with sufficient general accuracy to be very valuable. and They are continually appealed to in order to show the enormous improvement in ^the health of London in the 19th. as compared with the 18th centuries, and this comparison as regards Small-pox is one of the stock arguments of the doctors; and was strongly urged by the Royal Commissioners. It is stated over and over again, ^that down to the year 1800 small-pox deaths were [3 words illeg.] ,^excessive but ^that from the very introduction of vaccination ^{in 1800} they began to [5]⁹decrease, and it hasve been getting less and less ever since. No other disease ^{it is said} has decreased in the same striking manner.

(2) This being the very foundation of the supposed evidence in favour of vaccination it is necessary to examine it closely, when it will be found to be wholly worthless, and to illustrate in a striking manner the complete ignorance of doctors, and also of the Royal Commissioners, of the very elements of statistical enquiry. This requires some little explanation though it is really a very simple matter.

In order to be able to study the effect of ^{Vaccination any alleged cause of improved health of the community, we} must compare the death-rates before and after the alleg introduction of the alleged ^supposed cause of improvement, (in this case vaccination), and also compare these with the death rates from other ^{groups of} disease, and from all causes. These facts are given ^{by the Registrar-general} in tables showing the number of deaths each year in each million of the population. Now smallpox, many fevers, cholera &c. are what are termed epidemic diseases, which attack large populations [6]¹⁰at irregular intervals ^{with great severity} which at other times they are far less fatal and ^or more local. Hence the yearly death rates vary enormously. In 1796 more than 4000 per million died of smallpox in London while in the next year there were only about 800 and the following year (1798) over 3000. Again in 1870 less than 100 per million died of it, while in 1871 there were over 200 ^about 300, and in 1872 about 2500. Thus the figures go increasing and decreasing so suddenly and so irregularly, that by considering ^taking only a few years at one period and a few at another you can show an increase or a decrease according to what you wish to prove. Hence it is often ignorantly said that figures can be made to prove anything. But this is quite untrue. They can ^often be made to show anything, which is quite a different matter; but if properly exhibited and compared they lead to one conclusion only; they show the truth.

(3) There are a few simple rules for getting at the truth in such statistics as we are now discussing. One is that we must take as long periods of time as possible; [7]¹¹ another is that we must take use the largest numbers populations available. Two others ^conditions are ^almost equally important; we must compare ^{when possible} equal periods before and after vaccination was introduced; and we must when ever possible, ^also compare the increase of diminution of small-pox with those of other diseases, in order to discover whether there is anything peculiar ^exceptional in ^{the decrease of} small-pox mortality which requires a peculiar cause to explain it.

But with ^the ever varying figures in long columns are are so confusing to most people that it is impossible to make anything out of them; and to simplify them, averages have to be taken, showing the deaths every five or ^every ten years, and in other ways, so as to find out what they ^figures really mean, and even then, by altering the periods of beginning at different years, a ^very different result may often be shown.

By far the best way ^{and that usually} adopted by statisticians and mathematicians, is to draw out diagrams by which the whole course of the mortality from each disease or group of diseases can be seen and [8]¹² compared at a glance. From the various elaborate tables given be in the Reports of the Royal Commission and from the annual reports of the Registrar General, I constructed twelve diagrams, each showing the comparative rise or fall of small-pox mortality and other disease in various places and under different condition; and all ^these without exception demonstrate either that vaccination has no effect whatever or, that it tends to increase rather than decrease small-pox mortality. These are all given in my little book "Vaccination a Delusion" which can be had from the National Anti-Vaccination League for 8^d a copy.

(5) As many people are puzzled by ^{do not understand} these diagrams I have here given [2 words illeg.] a part of one of them in a simplified form which will be easily understaood ^{in order to make their render method of statistical diagrams intelligible to all,} and ^it will serve to show what is the nature of the evidence against vaccination, and also ^{how I prove} that the statements made by the doctors and by the Royal Commissioners are not only misleading by absolutely untrue.

[9]¹³

Explanation of the Diagram

(6) but absolutely untrue. The figures Explanation on the bottom and top of the diagram show the years, from 1770 to 1830, while those on the right and left show the number of deaths to each million [1 word illeg.] ^of population. on the average of each ten years. The three wavy lines show the proportion of deaths ^{to population} during this period of 60 years: the lower line the Small-pox deaths; that next above it the deaths from the other zymotic diseases, (fevers, diphtheria, whopping-cough &c.); while the top line show deaths from all diseases. These ^last deaths being so much more numerous, have had to be drawn out on a smaller scale in order to show them on the same page as the others.

(7) This diagram shows us that Small-pox decreased during the ten years before vaccination at very nearly the same rate as it did in the ten years after vaccination. The other Zymotic diseases decreased even more than sm[all]-pox during the ten years after vaccination. General mortality also decreased after 1800 much more [10]¹⁴ rapidly than before 1800. Yet the Royal Commissioners declare that there was nothing but vaccination to produce thise decrease of small-pox, and that there was no improvement in sanitation in the beginning of the 19th. century, to as compared with the latter part of the 18th century, to account for the difference.

(8) Now, in an Appendix to my Vaccination a Delusion, I have given an account of the a number of improvements affecting health at the end of the this very period which are amply sufficient to produce the results shown by the diagram, and I believe it is the most compact and most interesting account of these improvements yet given. The chief of them are (1) That many West end Squares and suburbs were built at this very period, and were inhabited chiefly by city people. (2) That the streets were more systematically cleaned and the roads improved (3) That the water-supply was much improved. (4) That potatoes, tea, and coffee came into more general use; and ^while the better roads allowed more fresh meat, and vegetables ^{and milk} to be used. (5) Cemeteries were formed [11]¹⁵ outside London and many Londo City grave yards were permanently closed. The result of these ^{five groups of} improvements was strikingly shown in the decrease of the general mortality death-rate in a number [of] the most fatal diseases (as recorded in a Table by Dr. Farr^{16 re-}printed in the 3rd. Report of the Royal Commission) to fully one half in 1801-10 as compared with 1771-80; and amount of improvement which has never occurred in any similar period during the whole period ^{of 270 years} for which we have s official statistics. And yet the ^Royal Commissioners declare that there is nothing but vaccination the co can explain the corresponding and very similar decrease in Small-pox!

[12]¹⁷

(9) As you will now understand the method of exhibiting statistics by means of diagrams, I do thus being able to compare one with another and see distinctly what they teach us, I will proceed to state the other more important conclusions ^{to be drawn} from our national statistics of death-rates. Those who wish to study them far more fully must obtain the book itself and examine the Diagrams and the full details there given.

IV.[sic] London death-rate during Registrations 1838-96

(1) The Diagram shows the same general features as that for the earlier period. The ^{These tables show us, that, neither the} general mortality and ^nor that from zymotic diseases do not decrease much till about 1868, but from that date [1 word illeg.] there has been a ^large continuous decrease. Small-pox had a sudden increase in 1838, when ^{in which year} the mortality was greater than it had been for ^{the preceeding}[sic] 25 years. Then it decreased slowly till 1870, and this ^decrease is alway^s ascribed by the doctors to vaccination. But in 1871 there was a great epidemic, when the mortality was greater [13]¹⁸ than at any period during the preceeding[sic] 70 years of almost universal ^{constantly increasing} vaccination! From that date ^{Since 1870} small-pox has decreased ^{but only} at about the same rate as the other zymotic diseases. The interesting thing to note here is, that the Main Drainage of London was completed in 1865, and about five years later (the time required for the connection of all the house drainage) began the marked diminution in ^the mortality above mentioned ^{began to show itself.} And if we average the ^enormous small-pox mortality of 1871 with that of the preceeding[sic] ten years, we shall see ^find that it is will ^{bring the small-pox mortality into} almost exactly correspondence with that from all other causes, and thus leave nothing to be accounted for by imputed to vaccination!

(2) In another diagram ^{in my book} I show that mortality from the ^{five groups of} zymotic diseases ^taken separately — Fevers, Whopping-cough, Diptheria and Scarlatina, Measles, and Small-pox, for the same period of ^Government Registration. All of these ^diseases show a nearly similar decrease in the latter half of the period, except measles, which has ^shows hardly any [14]¹⁹ diminished^ution at all; but there is reason to believe that the reason for ^{cause of} this is, that, when vaccinated children die suddenly from ^{after a short illness of die of} Small-pox, the measles is often given as the cause of death.

V. Death-rates in England and Wales during the Period of Registration.

(1) My third Diagram is ^{one of the} most instructive and conclusive ^{in my book}, because it deals with the whole population of England and Wales and the death-rates from various groups of diseases as in the first ^illustrative Diagram. In the first 25 years, from 1848 to 1872, there is on the average hardly any decrease either of General Mortality, Zymotics, or Small-Pox, since the enormous Small Pox mortality of 1871-72 if distributed over the preceeding[sic] ten years will bring it to correspond exactly ^closely with the other classes of mortality. But from 1873 to 1895 — the last 23 years shown — there is a diminution in all three of the diseases to a considerable extent ^amount. As For the last ten years the diminution in Small- [15]²⁰ -pox is the greatest; but this can be proved to be not due to vaccination, as I will now explain.

(2) It is only from the years 1872, after the great epidemic of Small-pox that all Vaccinations, private as well as public, have been officially registered, and the ^a table showing their amount has been given in the Final Report of the Royal Commission. From 1872 to 1882 the vaccinations amounted to 95 per cent of the births; this practically all were vaccinated if we allow for those that died before they could be operated on ^{or very soon afterwards}. But from that date the number of vaccination steadily decreases, till in 1895 they were only 80 per cent of the births, a diminution of 15 per cent in 14 years. If vaccination prevented small-pox we ought to have had a considerable increase of the disease during this period; instead of which it is in this period only that the diminution of small-^-pox has ever been more marked than that of the other zymotic diseases! Here then we have the first distinct proof tha^t its is vaccination which keeps up the disease, and that [16]²¹ when it a larger number of children escaped the blood-poisoning lancet small-pox diminishes!

VI. Thirty Years of rapidly Decreasing vaccination in Leicester and its Teachings.

(1) The great manufacturing town of Leicester with nearly 200,000 inhabitants, affords the most conclusive proof of the uselessness of vaccination that it is possible to have: and the doctors and government—officials carefully avoid dealing with ^it except to prophecy evils which have never come to pass.

Down to 1872 Leicester was one of the most completely vaccinated towns in the kingdom, the number of vaccinations, owing to alarm after epidemics, several times exceeding the number of births. Yet in 1871, at the very height of its ^good vaccination-record, it was attacked by the epidemic with extreme severity, its small—pox deaths during that year being more than 3500 per million of the population, or more than ^about a thousand per million more than the mortality in London during the [17]²² same epidemic. If ever a test experiment existed it is this of Leicester where an almost completely vaccinated community suffered more than ^imperfectly over^unvaccinated and terribly insanitary London on the average of the last forty years of the 18th. century!

But even more conclusive evidence is to come. [1 word illeg]

(2) That terr fearful mortality destroyed the faith of Leicester in vaccination. Poor and rich alike, the workers and the ^municipal authorities began to refuse vaccination for their children and this refusal continued till in 1890, instead of 95 per cent, ^{the vaccinations reached} only 5 per cent of births! [1 word illeg.] As this ominous decrease of vaccination went on the doctors again and again prophesied against it, that once small-pox was introduced it would run through the town like wild-fire and decimate the population. Yet it has been introduced again and again, but it has never spread; and from that day to this no town in the kingdom of approximately equal population has had such a very small small-pox mortality as this almost completely unpr unvaccinated and, as the doctors [18]²³ say — unprotected population! Surely this completes the demonstration that vaccination instead of preventing, increases the liability ^{to small-pox}, and that the only way to abolish the disease is to do as Leicester did — leave off vaccination altogether and devote their our energies to sanitation, and ^the isolation of such rare cases as do occur.

Yet this wonderfully conclusive test experiment others see we have ever was passed over by the Royal Commissioners in 1894, will with a few scattered remarks, which are either absolutely not untrue or entirely beside the question. (See Vaccination a Delusion p. 277.)

[19]²⁴

VII. The Army and Navy, a demonstration of the Uselessness of Vaccination.

(1) The doctors always claim that, though the effect of vaccination in infancy dies out, yet revaccination offers and almost complete protection for the rest of the persons’ life. In a circular issued in 1884, and ^{widely distributed up to the time of the Royal Commission,} with the approval of the Local Government Boards, it is stated that — "soldiers who have been revaccinated can live in cities intensely affected with ^by small-pox without themselves suffering to any appreciable degree from the disease". I will now show you that this statement is absolutely false.

(2) All soldiers and sailors are revaccinated on entering the service, unless they have recently had small-pox. The reports of the Royal Commission give the small-pox deaths in the Army and Navy from 1860 to 1894. The Registrar General gives the total mortality from disease in the two services for the same period. I have compared these two mortalities by a diagram, and this is what we [20]²⁵ find. First — throughout the whole period the total mortality in the Army is much higher than in the Navy. Clearly, this is the result of the one ^class living in barracks, largely in towns and cities, the other in the midst of the pure and bracing sea-air. In the second place, there has been, in both services, throughout the 34 years, a continuous diminution of mortality, to the amount of nearly ^{so that it is now only about} one-third of what it was 34 years ago; and this enormous improvement is stated by the Army and Navy doctors to be due to the much better sanitation of ships and barracks and ^to the great improvement in the food and general treatment, ^{and medical attention,} in both services.

Thirdly, — in both Army and Navy there has been a large decrease in the small-pox mortality, throughout the whole period, corresponding closely with that of the general mortality, and certainly due to the same causes — improved sanitation and medical treatment.

Fourthly, — in the very same years, when there was ^{(1871-2) as} the great epidemic in England and ^on the continent [21]²⁶ there was also a small-pox epidemic both in the Army and the Navy, and taking account of the age of the men and their condition of constant medical supervision, quite as severe as among the general population, who had not the alleged complete protection of revaccination.

Fifthly — this is proved by two comparisons, ^{with Ireland and with Leicester,} both from tables given in the Reports of the Royal Commission extending from 1864 to 1894. The diagrams formed from these tables, show us, that for ^Irish men of about the same ages as our soldiers and sailors, though ^{the other population suffered more} during the epidemic of 1872 they suffered more ^but for the whole of the entire remainder of the 30 years they had rather less small pox mortality; while since 1881 they have had not half the mortality.

(3) The other comparison is with Leicester, in which city, in the period of twenty years during which they have been growing less and less vaccinated, has had less than ^only 16 small-pox deaths per 100,000 of its total population, including thousands of unvaccinated [22]²⁷ children and infants ^{during the whole period 20 years,} while for the same period it was about four times as great in the Army and twice as great in the Navy ^{the deaths in the Army and Navy were no less than 37 per million.}

And yet we have ^had the impudently false statement circulated by ^to thousands under the approval of the Local Government Board, that the revaccinated Army and Navy, do not, under the worst circumstances "appreciably suffer"! While The Royal Commissioners ^{on the other hand} shirk the whole matter — make no comparisons with other populations — but state vaguely, that "particular classes" who have been "exceptionally" revaccinated, exhibit "quite exceptional advantage in relation to small-pox" — a statement which, as regards the only "exceptionally revaccinated large classes of men, is, as their own tables show, the very reverse of the truth!

[23]²⁸

VIII. How to deal with Medical Men Pro-vaccinators.

(1) In my Vaccination a Delusion I have given examples of the grossest misstatements of doctors and officials from the time of Jenner down to the present day. They are such as often to appear incredible, but none of them have ^ever been disproved. Several have been given here; and ^but there is one more which is so universal that it must be briefly stated. ^{referred to.} In all official reports of Small-pox epidemics the deaths ^fatality of the unvaccinated are ^is always declared to be enormous as compared with the vaccinated. As an example, Dr. Gayton in a table published in the 2nd. Report of the Royal Commission, gives the ^{percentage of} deaths to cases as follows: —

Vaccinated — 7.45 per cent.

Unvaccinated — 43.00 ""

But all the medical writers on small pox during the 18th century agree in stating that the average death-rate of small pox patients was ^then from 14 to 18 per cent. But At that [24]²⁹ time, ^however, the sanitary state of our towns and hospitals was abominable, while the medical treatment of small-pox was so incredibly bad that it is a wonder any survived. Yet the doctors ask us to believe that now, with far healthier conditions and with far better treatment and nursing, ^{more than} twice ^{as many} unvaccinated small-pox patients die as died then, when all were unvaccinated! The thing is absolutely incredible and absurd; and is due solely to the fact that doctors register all deaths from small-pox ^as "unvaccinated" when they can possibly find any excuse for doing so. One of them has stated that in "the mere assertions of patients or their friends that they were vaccinated counted for nothing". The alleged enormous mortality of the unvaccinated is further shown to be erroneous by the fact that the ^published Reports of three of the largest small-pox hospitals for London from 1876 to 1879 showed that the average small-pox mortality ^{of all patients} was about 18 per cent, or a little higher than [25]³⁰ during the 18th century. This may be explained by partly by the fact that many of the milder cases do not go to the hospitals, and partly by the weakening of the constitution by ^{due to} the blood-poisoning operation of vaccination, which, under similar when conditions ^{are alike} renders the vaccinated less able to resist small-pox than the unvaccinated. It has been well asked — "If the unvaccinate about 36 per cent of unvaccinated patients now die of small pox while only about 18 per cent died in the 18th century who ^{or what} kills the other 18 per cent? It cannot be the general conditions since the mortality from all diseases has greatly diminished. There remains only the docto medical treatment. Do doctors accept this?

(2) Now if any one brings forward doctor’s ^{or official’s} figures as to the enormous value, ask them first the above questions. They will deny the facts. There, in my book you will find the ^official authority for these and all the other facts referred to. They will be obliged to [26]³¹ say they have never enquired into them; and you may then tell them that they have no right to teach you who have enquired into them.

If you have a medical man to deal with, ask him why he does not follow ^admit Sir John Simon’s [1 word illeg.] ^statement that "the great masses of national experience can alone prove the value of vaccination". Then show him the Diagrams (in my book) which I have here referred to, and ask him to prove that they show "the great benefits of vaccination", instead of showing as they do, its absolute worthlessness.

(3) As to its terrible dangers, the thousands of lives vaccination has destroyed or [1 word illeg] ^ruined as regards health, I have no space to refer to them here, but ample evidence from the Royal Commission Reports is given in my book.

(4) Doctors and Members of Parliament are the most ^alike grossly ignorant classes on the true history of the effects of Vaccination. They require to be taught; and nothing is so likely to teach them [27]³² as to show them the diagrams I have referred to in this short exposition of the subject — those of London for 30 years before and after Vaccination — for of England and Wales during the period of official registration — of Leicester which has almost abolished Small-pox by refusing to be vaccinated for 30 years, — and for the Army and Navy, — which though thoroughly revaccinated and therefore (according to the doctors) as well protected as they possibly can be, yet die of small-pox at least as much as badly vaccinated Ireland, and many times more than unvaccinated Leicester.

A doctor who has not studied these most vital statistics has no right to an opinion on this subject.

A candidate who will not give the necessary time and attention to study them, but is yet ready to vote for penal laws against those who know infinitely more [28]³³ of the question than he does, is utterly unworthy to receive a single vote from any self-respecting constituency.