From: David Wright on
In article <1147181685.902507.256830(a)u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com>,
Max C. <maxc246(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>john wrote:
>> Even if that wasn't true, and fleas or droplets also were vectors, it
>> doesn't exactly paint it as highly infectious, now does it?
>
>Not at all. Even the CDC's current documentation states that it's less
>infectious than other diseases:
>
>http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/rr5207a1.htm
>"Airborne transmission has occurred rarely (2). Epidemiologic studies
>have demonstrated that smallpox has a lower rate of transmission than
>certain other diseases (e.g., measles, pertussis, and influenza)"
>
>We've yet to see the "flu epidemic" we've been hearing about for so
>many flu seasons now., so if smallpox is transmitted at a lower rate
>than the flu, what is everyone so afraid of?

Are you under the impression that flu is not terribly contagious?
I really don't understand what you're trying to say here.

>Mass smallpox vaccinations have proven ineffective.

Older vaccinations, yes. But those quaint historical examples weren't
using the same vaccine we use today.

>Histroy shows that
>very clearly. And even *IF* there's a smallpox outbreak, the vaccine
>can still be effective up to several days after exposure should one
>choose to get vaccinated. There's no good reason for mass vaccination.

As of today, I agree with you. But if there were an outbreak, it
could only be because someone had weaponized the stuff. And that
would be scary.

-- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net
These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct.
"If you can't say something nice, then sit next to me."
-- Alice Roosevelt Longworth


From: David Wright on
In article <ia6dnXKZta_e-MLZRVny3w(a)bt.com>, john <scu23(a)btinternet.com> wrote:
>
>"PeterB" <pkm(a)mytrashmail.com> wrote in message
>news:1147096908.140648.320990(a)y43g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>>
>
>>>
>>> > He also said
>>> > that mortality rates have been skewed by over-weighting of data series
>>> > with children, who are more vulnerable to the disease. He pegs the
>>> > actual case mortality rate at closer to 1-in-7, saying infection rates
>>> > would have declined on their own (just more slowly) without
>>> > intervention programs.
>
>case mortality http://www.whale.to/a/case.html
>
>essentially a harmless disease if under proper medical care

So says this century-old reference. Real easy to check.

-- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net
These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct.
"If you can't say something nice, then sit next to me."
-- Alice Roosevelt Longworth




From: Max C. on
David Wright wrote:
> >We've yet to see the "flu epidemic" we've been hearing about for so
> >many flu seasons now., so if smallpox is transmitted at a lower rate
> >than the flu, what is everyone so afraid of?
>
> Are you under the impression that flu is not terribly contagious?
> I really don't understand what you're trying to say here.

I'm trying to say that the mentions of smallpox spreading from one
hospital room to many other "victims" on above floors through an open
window is a load of hogwash. My position is supported by CDC
documentation (which I have already posted direct links to.)

I'm also trying to say that the "contageous-ness" of the flu, smallpox,
or ANY other viral disease is dependent on the overall health of the
individual. I haven't had the flu since I was a kid, even though I've
spent my fair share of time around those that I KNEW had the flu. I've
NEVER had a flu vaccine, and I never will. The human body has natural
defenses against viral infections. It just happens to be the case that
most Americans today don't have a diet that provides the proper weapons
for defense against those diseases.

> >Mass smallpox vaccinations have proven ineffective.
>
> Older vaccinations, yes. But those quaint historical examples weren't
> using the same vaccine we use today.

Which were also ineffective until the ring quarantine method was used.
As I said, because the new vaccine failed until the ring method was
employed, it begs the question "Which deserves the credit for smallpox
elimination, the vaccine or the quarantine?" The answer is, no one
knows for sure... but we DO know, as John pointed out, that smallpox
outbreaks can be and *have been* eliminated with quarantine alone.

> >Histroy shows that
> >very clearly. And even *IF* there's a smallpox outbreak, the vaccine
> >can still be effective up to several days after exposure should one
> >choose to get vaccinated. There's no good reason for mass vaccination.
>
> As of today, I agree with you. But if there were an outbreak, it
> could only be because someone had weaponized the stuff. And that
> would be scary.

That *WOULD* be scary, but it still wouldn't require mass vaccination
of an entire country. You could vaccinate the population that was
believed to have been hit, quarantine them and let the rest of the
country go about its business. Of course, there's still the problem of
"Would it be the right vaccine?" If terrorists were smart enough to
weaponize smallpox, I doubt they'd be dumb enough to use a variant that
already has a vaccine available for it.

Max.

From: Rich on

"john" <scu23(a)btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:F8CdnYFjqNOO58LZRVnytQ(a)bt.com...
>
> "Vaccine-man" <ziggittes(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1147103515.617706.226550(a)j73g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>> Smallpox is a harmless disease?
>>
>
> under proper medical care, not from you in other words
>
> "Not one case receiving homeopathic care died, while the "old school"
> doctors lost twenty percent of their (smallpox) cases.....I gave about
> three hundred internal vaccinations, five to adults acting as practical
> nurses; to the man who installed the telephone and lights in the
> pest-house; to mothers who slept with their children while they had
> smallpox in its severest form. All of these people, exposed daily, were
> immune."--W. L. Bonnell, MD http://www.whale.to/v/bonnell.html
>
> "Dr. Russell T. Trall, the eminent Natural Hygienist, considered smallpox
> "as essentially . . . not a dangerous disease." He cared for large numbers
> of patients afflicted with smallpox and never lost a case. Under
> conventional medical treatment, patients were drugged heroically, bled
> profusely, were smothered in blankets, wallowed in dirty linen, were
> allowed no water, fresh air and stuffed with milk, brandy or wine.
> Antimony and Mercury were medicated in large doses. Physicians kept their
> patients bundled up warm in bed, with the room heated and doors and
> windows carefully closed, so that not a breath of fresh air could get in,
> and given freely large doses of drugs to induce sweating (Sudorifics),
> plus wine and aromatized liquors. Fever patients were put into vaporbath
> chambers in order to sweat the impurities out of the system. Given no
> water when they cried for it and when gasping for air were carried to a
> dry-hot room and after a while were returned to the steam torture. Many
> must have died of Heat Stroke!"--Dr Shelton DC
> http://www.whale.to/vaccine/shelton.html
>
> "Both Press and Radio continue to preach that smallpox is a terribly
> infectious and deadly scourge. They never tell us that " - . - provided no
> mischief be done either by physician or nurse, it is the most safe and
> slight of all diseases". (Dr. Thomas Sydenham, 1688).--Lionel Dole
> http://www.whale.to/v/dole.html

Right . . . All those native Americans who died by the millions in the
fifteenth through eighteenth centuries, having no physicians or nurses to
torture them to death, must have died of other, less "safe and slight"
diseases. I wonder what "radio" preachers Dr. Sydenham was listening to in
1688, more than two centuries before Marconi's invention of radio.



>
> "Mr. Pickering, who treated cases at Gloucester by the "water cure"
> method, declared that his fatality rate was as low as 2 per cent."----
> Lilly Loat [Book 1951] The Truth About Vaccination and Immunization
>
> unvaccinated case fatality-rate for the 1904 portion of the Leicester
> epidemic, of only 1.6 per cent. http://www.whale.to/a/biggs.html
>
>
>
> and that is without vitamin c as medicine http://www.whale.to/a/levy4.html
>
>

Bullshit! These are smug claims that aren't even backed up with anecdotal
evidence. All credible sources put the mortality rate for smallpox in the
15% to 30% range, even with modern supportive care. Smallpox has
historically killed more people than any other infectious disease, possibly
more than all other infectious diseases together. It's a hideously painful
way to die, too; and the survivors are usually monstrously disfigured as
well.
--


--Rich

Recommended websites:

http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles
http://www.acahf.org.au
http://www.quackwatch.org/
http://www.skeptic.com/
http://www.csicop.org/


From: john on

"Rich" <joshew(a)hawaii.rr.com> wrote in message
news:5KS8g.217$9W5.86(a)tornado.socal.rr.com...
>

>
> Right . . . All those native Americans who died by the millions in the
> fifteenth through eighteenth centuries, having no physicians or nurses to
> torture them to death, must have died of other, less "safe and slight"
> diseases. I wonder what "radio" preachers Dr. Sydenham was listening to in
> 1688, more than two centuries before Marconi's invention of radio.
>
> Bullshit! These are smug claims that aren't even backed up with anecdotal
> evidence. All credible sources put the mortality rate for smallpox in the
> 15% to 30% range, even with modern supportive care. Smallpox has
> historically killed more people than any other infectious disease,
> possibly more than all other infectious diseases together. It's a
> hideously painful way to die, too; and the survivors are usually
> monstrously disfigured as well.
> --

You need to see a hypnotist to get rid of that brainwashing.
http://www.whale.to/vaccine/rationalization_h.html