From: PeterB - Original on
The Truth About Vaccine as a Life-Saving "Medicine"

The timeline of vaccine introduction and impact can be seen
graphically at http://www.vaccinationdebate.com/web1.html. Infectious
disease mortality declined dramatically prior to availability of most
vaccine (See "Public Health at the Crossroads," by R. Beaglehole and
R. Bonita, pg 43) such that only 3.5%, AT MOST, of the decline in
disease-related mortality from 1900 to 1975 could be attributed to
measures introduced for the control of these diseases. Whether
vaccine was responsible for even 1% of those declines is not known.
The graphs show that declines in severe illness leading to death prior
to use of vaccine was profound. In one case, those declines occurred
without vaccine present at all, further demonstrating the McKinlay
finding cited by Beaglehole and Bonita. If the vast majority of
declines in infectious disease mortality occurred before most vaccines
were available, the trend in declining severity of these illnesses
would naturally have continued past introduction of vaccine. And that
is exactly what happened. The purported benefits of vaccine in
reducing rates of infection and in conferring meaningful resistance to
disease are based almost completely on pre-existing declines in the
severity of those very diseases. This has occurred against a backdrop
of limited safety data and a history of serious, often fatal, vaccine
side effects.(1)

It would seem obvious to most that public health policy should fully
assess the risk of any medical intervention and it's potential for
unintended consequences, yet this has rarely been the case. A lack of
published science on both vaccine effectiveness and safety has left
considerable doubt as to whether artificial immunization can safely
inoculate or accomplish real, as opposed to theoretical, disease
resistance. Whereas the success of drug development for the treatment
of various diseases in general has been rather mixed when measuring
real health outcomes, the history of vaccine development has been
almost absurdly tragic.(1) For instance, a string of vaccine failures
during earlier periods of population wide experimentation (a practice
that continues to this day) ultimately took the lives of at least two
hundred thousand people worldwide. Today, vaccines are regarded as
relatively safe, but in the absence of proper study demonstrating
this, ethical scientific conduct should discourage their use. The
premise for this argument in modern scientific circles is the
Precautionary Principle, which states that any intervention (medical
or otherwise) must be proven safe by those advocating its use.
Remarkably, the vaccine makers have managed to acquire waivers of
liability protecting them from legal recourse if and when the public
is harmed by vaccines. In the absence of valid safety data, such an
arrangement is immoral.

It is interesting to note that rates of infection, unlike measles
mortality, were never reliably assessed and were, in fact,
dramatically under reported to health agencies. According to Alfred
S. Evans and Richard A. Kaslow in their book, "Viral Infections of
Humans," incidence of measles were under-reported by at least a factor
of ten. So say the authors, "...prior to introduction of measles
vaccine, about 400,000 cases of measles were reported in the United
States every year, but 4 million children were born and essentially
all of them ultimately developed measles antibody that could only have
been acquired as the result of infection. Thus, the mean true number
of cases per year was about 4 million." So, the infection rate was
ten times higher than was generally reported, meaning the true
mortality rate prior to vaccine was just one tenth what is commonly
believed. It can be argued that vaccine research is based almost
entirely on theoretical science in the form of antibody titres,
community surveys and historical fallacies. Whereas artificial
immunization may inoculate a narrow band of phenotypes, it is not
equivalent to immunity and works unpredictably. In the absence of
meaningful safety data, therefore, vaccine remains outside the
boundaries of "evidence based medicine."

Note that, among 30 countries with childhood vaccination programs, the
one with the highest mortality rate for children under 5yrs of age is
the country with the largest number of childhood vaccines.  That
country is the USA. Not surprisingly, childhood mortality rates in
countries with the LEAST number of vaccines in their early
immunization schedules are those with the LOWEST childhood mortality
rates.

[ref. http://www.generationrescue.org/documents/SPECIAL%20REPORT%20AUTISM%202.pdf]


(1) "Smallpox Vaccine: Does it Work?" published by Holistic Pediatric
Association.

"During the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, when smallpox
epidemics ran rampant, the introduction of smallpox vaccination was
often followed by an increased incidence of the disease. Many vaccine
critics accused the smallpox vaccine of precipitating these
epidemics. A disastrous smallpox epidemic occurred in England during
the period 1871-1873 at a time when the compulsory smallpox
vaccination law had resulted in nearly universal coverage. A Royal
Commission was appointed in 1889 to investigate the history of
vaccination in the United Kingdom. Evidence mounted that smallpox
epidemics increased dramatically after 1854, the year the compulsory
vaccination law went into effect. In the London epidemic of 1857-1859,
there were more than 14,000 deaths; in the 1863-1865 outbreak 20,000
deaths; and from 1871 to 1873 all of Europe was swept by the worst
smallpox epidemic in recorded history. In England and Wales alone,
45,000 people died of smallpox at a time when, according to official
estimates, 97 percent of the population had been vaccinated.

"When Japan started compulsory vaccination against smallpox in 1872
the disease steadily increased each year. In 1892 more than 165,000
cases occurred with 30,000 deaths in a completely vaccinated
population. During the same time period Australia had no compulsory
vaccination laws, and only three deaths occurred from smallpox over a
15-year period.

"Germany adopted a compulsory vaccination law in 1834, and rigorously
enforced re-vaccinations. Yet during the period 1871-1872 there were
125,000 deaths from smallpox. In Berlin itself 17,000 cases of
smallpox occurred among the vaccinated population, of whom 2,240 were
under ten years of age, and of these vaccinated children 736 died.

"In the Philippines, global public health measures were instituted
when the United States began its occupation to establish a self-
reliant government in the early 1900s. The incidence of smallpox
steadily declined and the compulsory vaccine campaign was credited
with this dramatic reduction. However, in the years 1917 to 1919, the
Philippines experienced the worst epidemic of smallpox in the
country's history with over 160,000 cases and over 70,000 deaths in a
completely vaccinated population. Over 43,000 deaths from smallpox
occurred in 1919 alone. The entire population of the Philippines at
the time was only 11 million.

"Vaccine failures of this magnitude may have several causes. The
vaccine used could have been defective. During that period it was
difficult to verify what the vaccine actually contained. The vaccine
could have been contaminated with smallpox virus and actually caused
epidemics. Or vaccine critics may have been correct in asserting that
Jenner's cowpox vaccine, which is essentially the same vaccine used
today, simply did not work to prevent smallpox."

Copyright 2009 Holistic Pediatric Association
From: Jan Drew on
On Jan 16, 4:11�pm, PeterB - Original <p...(a)mytrashmail.com> wrote:
> The Truth About Vaccine as a Life-Saving "Medicine"
>
> The timeline of vaccine introduction and impact can be seen
> graphically athttp://www.vaccinationdebate.com/web1.html. Infectious
> disease mortality declined dramatically prior to availability of most
> vaccine (See "Public Health at the Crossroads," by R. Beaglehole and
> R. Bonita, pg 43) such that only 3.5%, AT MOST, of the decline in
> disease-related mortality from 1900 to 1975 could be attributed to
> measures introduced for the control of these diseases. �Whether
> vaccine was responsible for even 1% of those declines is not known.
> The graphs show that declines in severe illness leading to death prior
> to use of vaccine was profound. �In one case, those declines occurred
> without vaccine present at all, further demonstrating the McKinlay
> finding cited by Beaglehole and Bonita. �If the vast majority of
> declines in infectious disease mortality occurred before most vaccines
> were available, the trend in declining severity of these illnesses
> would naturally have continued past introduction of vaccine. �And that
> is exactly what happened. �The purported benefits of vaccine in
> reducing rates of infection and in conferring meaningful resistance to
> disease are based almost completely on pre-existing declines in the
> severity of those very diseases. �This has occurred against a backdrop
> of limited safety data and a history of serious, often fatal, vaccine
> side effects.(1)
>
> It would seem obvious to most that public health policy should fully
> assess the risk of any medical intervention and it's potential for
> unintended consequences, yet this has rarely been the case. �A lack of
> published science on both vaccine effectiveness and safety has left
> considerable doubt as to whether artificial immunization can safely
> inoculate or accomplish real, as opposed to theoretical, disease
> resistance. �Whereas the success of drug development for the treatment
> of various diseases in general has been rather mixed when measuring
> real health outcomes, the history of vaccine development has been
> almost absurdly tragic.(1) �For instance, a string of vaccine failures
> during earlier periods of population wide experimentation (a practice
> that continues to this day) ultimately took the lives of at least two
> hundred thousand people worldwide. �Today, vaccines are regarded as
> relatively safe, but in the absence of proper study demonstrating
> this, ethical scientific conduct should discourage their use. �The
> premise for this argument in modern scientific circles is the
> Precautionary Principle, which states that any intervention (medical
> or otherwise) must be proven safe by those advocating its use.
> Remarkably, the vaccine makers have managed to acquire waivers of
> liability protecting them from legal recourse if and when the public
> is harmed by vaccines. �In the absence of valid safety data, such an
> arrangement is immoral.
>
> It is interesting to note that rates of infection, unlike measles
> mortality, were never reliably assessed and were, in fact,
> dramatically under reported to health agencies. �According to Alfred
> S. Evans and Richard A. Kaslow in their book, "Viral Infections of
> Humans," incidence of measles were under-reported by at least a factor
> of ten. �So say the authors, "...prior to introduction of measles
> vaccine, about 400,000 cases of measles were reported in the United
> States every year, but 4 million children were born and essentially
> all of them ultimately developed measles antibody that could only have
> been acquired as the result of infection. �Thus, the mean true number
> of cases per year was about 4 million." �So, the infection rate was
> ten times higher than was generally reported, meaning the true
> mortality rate prior to vaccine was just one tenth what is commonly
> believed. �It can be argued that vaccine research is based almost
> entirely on theoretical science in the form of antibody titres,
> community surveys and historical fallacies. �Whereas artificial
> immunization may inoculate a narrow band of phenotypes, it is not
> equivalent to immunity and works unpredictably. �In the absence of
> meaningful safety data, therefore, vaccine remains outside the
> boundaries of "evidence based medicine."
>
> Note that, among 30 countries with childhood vaccination programs, the
> one with the highest mortality rate for children under 5yrs of age is
> the country with the largest number of childhood vaccines. �That
> country is the USA. �Not surprisingly, childhood mortality rates in
> countries with the LEAST number of vaccines in their early
> immunization schedules are those with the LOWEST childhood mortality
> rates.
>
> [ref.http://www.generationrescue.org/documents/SPECIAL%20REPORT%20AUTISM%2...]
>
> (1) "Smallpox Vaccine: Does it Work?" published by Holistic Pediatric
> Association.
>
> "During the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, when smallpox
> epidemics ran rampant, the introduction of smallpox vaccination was
> often followed by an increased incidence of the disease. Many vaccine
> critics accused the smallpox vaccine of precipitating these
> epidemics. �A disastrous smallpox epidemic occurred in England during
> the period 1871-1873 at a time when the compulsory smallpox
> vaccination law had resulted in nearly universal coverage. A Royal
> Commission was appointed in 1889 to investigate the history of
> vaccination in the United Kingdom. Evidence mounted that smallpox
> epidemics increased dramatically after 1854, the year the compulsory
> vaccination law went into effect. In the London epidemic of 1857-1859,
> there were more than 14,000 deaths; in the 1863-1865 outbreak 20,000
> deaths; and from 1871 to 1873 all of Europe was swept by the worst
> smallpox epidemic in recorded history. In England and Wales alone,
> 45,000 people died of smallpox at a time when, according to official
> estimates, 97 percent of the population had been vaccinated.
>
> "When Japan started compulsory vaccination against smallpox in 1872
> the disease steadily increased each year. In 1892 more than 165,000
> cases occurred with 30,000 deaths in a completely vaccinated
> population. During the same time period Australia had no compulsory
> vaccination laws, and only three deaths occurred from smallpox over a
> 15-year period.
>
> "Germany adopted a compulsory vaccination law in 1834, and rigorously
> enforced re-vaccinations. Yet during the period 1871-1872 there were
> 125,000 deaths from smallpox. In Berlin itself 17,000 cases of
> smallpox occurred among the vaccinated population, of whom 2,240 were
> under ten years of age, and of these vaccinated children 736 died.
>
> "In the Philippines, global public health measures were instituted
> when the United States began its occupation to establish a self-
> reliant government in the early 1900s. The incidence of smallpox
> steadily declined and the compulsory vaccine campaign was credited
> with this dramatic reduction. However, in the years 1917 to 1919, the
> Philippines experienced the worst epidemic of smallpox in the
> country's history with over 160,000 cases and over 70,000 deaths in a
> completely vaccinated population. Over 43,000 deaths from smallpox
> occurred in 1919 alone. The entire population of the Philippines at
> the time was only 11 million.
>
> "Vaccine failures of this magnitude may have several causes. The
> vaccine used could have been defective. During that period it was
> difficult to verify what the vaccine actually contained. The vaccine
> could have been contaminated with smallpox virus and actually caused
> epidemics. Or vaccine critics may have been correct in asserting that
> Jenner's cowpox vaccine, which is essentially the same vaccine used
> today, simply did not work to prevent smallpox."
>
> Copyright 2009 Holistic Pediatric Association

Peter when you put brackets a link it will not take you to it.
You have to leave the brackets off.

http://www.vaccinationdebate.com/web1.html.
From: PeterB - Original on
On Jan 16, 4:20 pm, Jan Drew <jdrew63...(a)aol.com> wrote:
> On Jan 16, 4:11 pm, PeterB - Original <p...(a)mytrashmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > The Truth About Vaccine as a Life-Saving "Medicine"
>
> > The timeline of vaccine introduction and impact can be seen
> > graphically athttp://www.vaccinationdebate.com/web1.html. Infectious
> > disease mortality declined dramatically prior to availability of most
> > vaccine (See "Public Health at the Crossroads," by R. Beaglehole and
> > R. Bonita, pg 43) such that only 3.5%, AT MOST, of the decline in
> > disease-related mortality from 1900 to 1975 could be attributed to
> > measures introduced for the control of these diseases. Whether
> > vaccine was responsible for even 1% of those declines is not known.
> > The graphs show that declines in severe illness leading to death prior
> > to use of vaccine was profound. In one case, those declines occurred
> > without vaccine present at all, further demonstrating the McKinlay
> > finding cited by Beaglehole and Bonita. If the vast majority of
> > declines in infectious disease mortality occurred before most vaccines
> > were available, the trend in declining severity of these illnesses
> > would naturally have continued past introduction of vaccine. And that
> > is exactly what happened. The purported benefits of vaccine in
> > reducing rates of infection and in conferring meaningful resistance to
> > disease are based almost completely on pre-existing declines in the
> > severity of those very diseases. This has occurred against a backdrop
> > of limited safety data and a history of serious, often fatal, vaccine
> > side effects.(1)
>
> > It would seem obvious to most that public health policy should fully
> > assess the risk of any medical intervention and it's potential for
> > unintended consequences, yet this has rarely been the case. A lack of
> > published science on both vaccine effectiveness and safety has left
> > considerable doubt as to whether artificial immunization can safely
> > inoculate or accomplish real, as opposed to theoretical, disease
> > resistance. Whereas the success of drug development for the treatment
> > of various diseases in general has been rather mixed when measuring
> > real health outcomes, the history of vaccine development has been
> > almost absurdly tragic.(1) For instance, a string of vaccine failures
> > during earlier periods of population wide experimentation (a practice
> > that continues to this day) ultimately took the lives of at least two
> > hundred thousand people worldwide. Today, vaccines are regarded as
> > relatively safe, but in the absence of proper study demonstrating
> > this, ethical scientific conduct should discourage their use. The
> > premise for this argument in modern scientific circles is the
> > Precautionary Principle, which states that any intervention (medical
> > or otherwise) must be proven safe by those advocating its use.
> > Remarkably, the vaccine makers have managed to acquire waivers of
> > liability protecting them from legal recourse if and when the public
> > is harmed by vaccines. In the absence of valid safety data, such an
> > arrangement is immoral.
>
> > It is interesting to note that rates of infection, unlike measles
> > mortality, were never reliably assessed and were, in fact,
> > dramatically under reported to health agencies. According to Alfred
> > S. Evans and Richard A. Kaslow in their book, "Viral Infections of
> > Humans," incidence of measles were under-reported by at least a factor
> > of ten. So say the authors, "...prior to introduction of measles
> > vaccine, about 400,000 cases of measles were reported in the United
> > States every year, but 4 million children were born and essentially
> > all of them ultimately developed measles antibody that could only have
> > been acquired as the result of infection. Thus, the mean true number
> > of cases per year was about 4 million." So, the infection rate was
> > ten times higher than was generally reported, meaning the true
> > mortality rate prior to vaccine was just one tenth what is commonly
> > believed. It can be argued that vaccine research is based almost
> > entirely on theoretical science in the form of antibody titres,
> > community surveys and historical fallacies. Whereas artificial
> > immunization may inoculate a narrow band of phenotypes, it is not
> > equivalent to immunity and works unpredictably. In the absence of
> > meaningful safety data, therefore, vaccine remains outside the
> > boundaries of "evidence based medicine."
>
> > Note that, among 30 countries with childhood vaccination programs, the
> > one with the highest mortality rate for children under 5yrs of age is
> > the country with the largest number of childhood vaccines. That
> > country is the USA. Not surprisingly, childhood mortality rates in
> > countries with the LEAST number of vaccines in their early
> > immunization schedules are those with the LOWEST childhood mortality
> > rates.
>
> > [ref.http://www.generationrescue.org/documents/SPECIAL%20REPORT%20AUTISM%2...]
>
> > (1) "Smallpox Vaccine: Does it Work?" published by Holistic Pediatric
> > Association.
>
> > "During the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, when smallpox
> > epidemics ran rampant, the introduction of smallpox vaccination was
> > often followed by an increased incidence of the disease. Many vaccine
> > critics accused the smallpox vaccine of precipitating these
> > epidemics. A disastrous smallpox epidemic occurred in England during
> > the period 1871-1873 at a time when the compulsory smallpox
> > vaccination law had resulted in nearly universal coverage. A Royal
> > Commission was appointed in 1889 to investigate the history of
> > vaccination in the United Kingdom. Evidence mounted that smallpox
> > epidemics increased dramatically after 1854, the year the compulsory
> > vaccination law went into effect. In the London epidemic of 1857-1859,
> > there were more than 14,000 deaths; in the 1863-1865 outbreak 20,000
> > deaths; and from 1871 to 1873 all of Europe was swept by the worst
> > smallpox epidemic in recorded history. In England and Wales alone,
> > 45,000 people died of smallpox at a time when, according to official
> > estimates, 97 percent of the population had been vaccinated.
>
> > "When Japan started compulsory vaccination against smallpox in 1872
> > the disease steadily increased each year. In 1892 more than 165,000
> > cases occurred with 30,000 deaths in a completely vaccinated
> > population. During the same time period Australia had no compulsory
> > vaccination laws, and only three deaths occurred from smallpox over a
> > 15-year period.
>
> > "Germany adopted a compulsory vaccination law in 1834, and rigorously
> > enforced re-vaccinations. Yet during the period 1871-1872 there were
> > 125,000 deaths from smallpox. In Berlin itself 17,000 cases of
> > smallpox occurred among the vaccinated population, of whom 2,240 were
> > under ten years of age, and of these vaccinated children 736 died.
>
> > "In the Philippines, global public health measures were instituted
> > when the United States began its occupation to establish a self-
> > reliant government in the early 1900s. The incidence of smallpox
> > steadily declined and the compulsory vaccine campaign was credited
> > with this dramatic reduction. However, in the years 1917 to 1919, the
> > Philippines experienced the worst epidemic of smallpox in the
> > country's history with over 160,000 cases and over 70,000 deaths in a
> > completely vaccinated population. Over 43,000 deaths from smallpox
> > occurred in 1919 alone. The entire population of the Philippines at
> > the time was only 11 million.
>
> > "Vaccine failures of this magnitude may have several causes. The
> > vaccine used could have been defective. During that period it was
> > difficult to verify what the vaccine actually contained. The vaccine
> > could have been contaminated with smallpox virus and actually caused
> > epidemics. Or vaccine critics may have been correct in asserting that
> > Jenner's cowpox vaccine, which is essentially the same vaccine used
> > today, simply did not work to prevent smallpox."
>
> > Copyright 2009 Holistic Pediatric Association
>
> Peter when you put brackets a link it will not take you to it.
> You have to leave the brackets off.
>
> http://www.vaccinationdebate.com/web1.html.

Jan, thank you for that info. You also reminded me that this link has
moved to another domain, which is now: http://www.vaclib.org/sites/debate/web1.html

HNY and be well!

From: Peter Parry on
On Sat, 16 Jan 2010 13:11:47 -0800 (PST), PeterB - Original
<pkm(a)mytrashmail.com> wrote:

>The Truth About Vaccine as a Life-Saving "Medicine"

If it is really the truth why do you continue to post patently false
statements to support it?

>The timeline of vaccine introduction and impact can be seen
>graphically at http://www.vaccinationdebate.com/web1.html. Infectious
>disease mortality declined dramatically prior to availability of most
>vaccine (See "Public Health at the Crossroads," by R. Beaglehole and
>R. Bonita, pg 43) such that only 3.5%, AT MOST, of the decline in
>disease-related mortality from 1900 to 1975 could be attributed to
>measures introduced for the control of these diseases.

What they wrote was -

"Various explanations have been advanced for the decline in mortality
rates. which gathered speed in nineteenth century Europe. McKeown
proposed that steady improvements in nutrition beginning in the
eighteenth century, together with improvements in water supply and
sanitation, an increase in the general standard of living following
[he Industrial Revolution, and a reduction in birth rates propelled
the health transition. The development of effective medical measures
was too late to make a major contribution to the mortality decline in
Europe and other western countries. For example, it has been estimated
that, at most, only 3.5% of the total decline in mortality in the
United States of America between 1900 and 1973 could be ascribed to
medical measures introduced for the major infectious diseases. On the
other hand, targeted public health Interventions including
vaccination, personal hygiene campaigns, and improved child health
care services, were of major importance....

The more recent decline in mortality in poorer countries has some
parallels with nineteenth-century Europe. For example, the dramatic
gains in China in the last four decades were associated with major
improvements in food supply {despite occasional devastating famines)
as well as public health campaigns directed at the control of
infectious diseases; literacy, especially for females, has also been
of major importance.

The most recent declines in mortality however, have been influenced
greatly by public health and medical care advances. For example,
smallpox, a major scourge of humankind for centuries, has been
eradicated, "

In the late 1800's there were a number of major killers accounting for
many deaths, particularly in infants. Poor nutrition, squalid
conditions and in particular poor water were major factors. In 1831
31,000 people in the UK died of Cholera, Typhus regularly killed
16,000 per year (double that in hot dry summer years). in 1840 50,000
succumbed to measles and whooping cough. No one doubts that prior to
the start of the second world war social and public health
improvements were by far the greatest influence on the well being of
the population. The work of civil engineers such as Bazalgette had a
far greater impact than any other measure.

By the end of WW2 however the civil engineering aspects of disease
mitigation were reaching the end of the road in the west and poor
housing and nutrition were no longer significant in many western
countries. In the UK wartime rationing had led to one of the best fed
populations ever but diseases such as Polio, measles, whooping cough
and mumps remained common and were not going to be reduced
significantly by social or public health measures. The major decline
in mortality in the west caused by social and economic influences upon
health and disease took place before 1930, after that time measures
such as vaccination had a far more profound effect.

The very valid point Beaglehole and Bonita make of course is that
there are still many parts of the world where social and public health
measures have the potential to improve life often at relatively small
cost. They do not, and never have, proposed that medical improvements
were either insignificant or unnecessary, you should read the whole
book.

>Whether
>vaccine was responsible for even 1% of those declines is not known.

Seek and ye shall find, there is ample evidence out there to the
contrary.

Your figure is meaningless. No one questions that massive
improvements in public health were made prior to the 1930's by social
and public health measures. No one doubts that in that time the
effect of public health improvement dwarfed that of medical advances.
However, beyond that time the picture changes dramatically.

For example in Rabies the death rate without vaccination is as near as
makes no difference 100%. With vaccination given pre-exposure and
immediately after suspected exposure it is nearly zero. There is no
other effective treatment.

The number of Hib meningitis cases in children under 5 years in the
USA was fairly steady at about 20 per 100,000 from 1980 until 1988
when Hib conjugate vaccine was introduced. By 1991 it had dropped to
about 3 cases per 100,000. During that time period there was no
significant alteration in standards of living or social health.

In the Gambia the rate of Hib meningitis in children prior to 1992
when the first vaccination against it started had been fairly constant
for decades at about 220 cases per 100,000. By 1998 it was about 5
per 100,000. In the same time there were no significant social
changes.

Polio affected 350,000 children worldwide in 1980, by 2006 that was
down to 800 because of vaccination. Since then it has increased again
and in 2008 was 1,655 because the mad mullahs of northern Nigeria say
that Polio vaccination is a plot by the USA to spread Aids and
infertility and are killing public health officials involved in
administering it. I wonder if any read Whale to get support for their
views??

>The graphs show that declines in severe illness leading to death prior
>to use of vaccine was profound. In one case, those declines occurred
>without vaccine present at all, further demonstrating the McKinlay
>finding cited by Beaglehole and Bonita.

Have any of the people misquoting their work ever read that book?

> If the vast majority of
>declines in infectious disease mortality occurred before most vaccines
>were available, the trend in declining severity of these illnesses
>would naturally have continued past introduction of vaccine.

It would? The control of rabid animals would have meant Rabies became
less severe?

>And that is exactly what happened.

No it didn't


From: Jan Drew on
On Jan 16, 5:21�pm, PeterB - Original <p...(a)mytrashmail.com> wrote:
> On Jan 16, 4:20�pm, Jan Drew <jdrew63...(a)aol.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jan 16, 4:11 pm, PeterB - Original <p...(a)mytrashmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > The Truth About Vaccine as a Life-Saving "Medicine"
>
> > > The timeline of vaccine introduction and impact can be seen
> > > graphically athttp://www.vaccinationdebate.com/web1.html. Infectious
> > > disease mortality declined dramatically prior to availability of most
> > > vaccine (See "Public Health at the Crossroads," by R. Beaglehole and
> > > R. Bonita, pg 43) such that only 3.5%, AT MOST, of the decline in
> > > disease-related mortality from 1900 to 1975 could be attributed to
> > > measures introduced for the control of these diseases. Whether
> > > vaccine was responsible for even 1% of those declines is not known.
> > > The graphs show that declines in severe illness leading to death prior
> > > to use of vaccine was profound. In one case, those declines occurred
> > > without vaccine present at all, further demonstrating the McKinlay
> > > finding cited by Beaglehole and Bonita. If the vast majority of
> > > declines in infectious disease mortality occurred before most vaccines
> > > were available, the trend in declining severity of these illnesses
> > > would naturally have continued past introduction of vaccine. And that
> > > is exactly what happened. The purported benefits of vaccine in
> > > reducing rates of infection and in conferring meaningful resistance to
> > > disease are based almost completely on pre-existing declines in the
> > > severity of those very diseases. This has occurred against a backdrop
> > > of limited safety data and a history of serious, often fatal, vaccine
> > > side effects.(1)
>
> > > It would seem obvious to most that public health policy should fully
> > > assess the risk of any medical intervention and it's potential for
> > > unintended consequences, yet this has rarely been the case. A lack of
> > > published science on both vaccine effectiveness and safety has left
> > > considerable doubt as to whether artificial immunization can safely
> > > inoculate or accomplish real, as opposed to theoretical, disease
> > > resistance. Whereas the success of drug development for the treatment
> > > of various diseases in general has been rather mixed when measuring
> > > real health outcomes, the history of vaccine development has been
> > > almost absurdly tragic.(1) For instance, a string of vaccine failures
> > > during earlier periods of population wide experimentation (a practice
> > > that continues to this day) ultimately took the lives of at least two
> > > hundred thousand people worldwide. Today, vaccines are regarded as
> > > relatively safe, but in the absence of proper study demonstrating
> > > this, ethical scientific conduct should discourage their use. The
> > > premise for this argument in modern scientific circles is the
> > > Precautionary Principle, which states that any intervention (medical
> > > or otherwise) must be proven safe by those advocating its use.
> > > Remarkably, the vaccine makers have managed to acquire waivers of
> > > liability protecting them from legal recourse if and when the public
> > > is harmed by vaccines. In the absence of valid safety data, such an
> > > arrangement is immoral.
>
> > > It is interesting to note that rates of infection, unlike measles
> > > mortality, were never reliably assessed and were, in fact,
> > > dramatically under reported to health agencies. According to Alfred
> > > S. Evans and Richard A. Kaslow in their book, "Viral Infections of
> > > Humans," incidence of measles were under-reported by at least a factor
> > > of ten. So say the authors, "...prior to introduction of measles
> > > vaccine, about 400,000 cases of measles were reported in the United
> > > States every year, but 4 million children were born and essentially
> > > all of them ultimately developed measles antibody that could only have
> > > been acquired as the result of infection. Thus, the mean true number
> > > of cases per year was about 4 million." So, the infection rate was
> > > ten times higher than was generally reported, meaning the true
> > > mortality rate prior to vaccine was just one tenth what is commonly
> > > believed. It can be argued that vaccine research is based almost
> > > entirely on theoretical science in the form of antibody titres,
> > > community surveys and historical fallacies. Whereas artificial
> > > immunization may inoculate a narrow band of phenotypes, it is not
> > > equivalent to immunity and works unpredictably. In the absence of
> > > meaningful safety data, therefore, vaccine remains outside the
> > > boundaries of "evidence based medicine."
>
> > > Note that, among 30 countries with childhood vaccination programs, the
> > > one with the highest mortality rate for children under 5yrs of age is
> > > the country with the largest number of childhood vaccines. That
> > > country is the USA. Not surprisingly, childhood mortality rates in
> > > countries with the LEAST number of vaccines in their early
> > > immunization schedules are those with the LOWEST childhood mortality
> > > rates.
>
> > > [ref.http://www.generationrescue.org/documents/SPECIAL%20REPORT%20AUTISM%2...]
>
> > > (1) "Smallpox Vaccine: Does it Work?" published by Holistic Pediatric
> > > Association.
>
> > > "During the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, when smallpox
> > > epidemics ran rampant, the introduction of smallpox vaccination was
> > > often followed by an increased incidence of the disease. Many vaccine
> > > critics accused the smallpox vaccine of precipitating these
> > > epidemics. A disastrous smallpox epidemic occurred in England during
> > > the period 1871-1873 at a time when the compulsory smallpox
> > > vaccination law had resulted in nearly universal coverage. A Royal
> > > Commission was appointed in 1889 to investigate the history of
> > > vaccination in the United Kingdom. Evidence mounted that smallpox
> > > epidemics increased dramatically after 1854, the year the compulsory
> > > vaccination law went into effect. In the London epidemic of 1857-1859,
> > > there were more than 14,000 deaths; in the 1863-1865 outbreak 20,000
> > > deaths; and from 1871 to 1873 all of Europe was swept by the worst
> > > smallpox epidemic in recorded history. In England and Wales alone,
> > > 45,000 people died of smallpox at a time when, according to official
> > > estimates, 97 percent of the population had been vaccinated.
>
> > > "When Japan started compulsory vaccination against smallpox in 1872
> > > the disease steadily increased each year. In 1892 more than 165,000
> > > cases occurred with 30,000 deaths in a completely vaccinated
> > > population. During the same time period Australia had no compulsory
> > > vaccination laws, and only three deaths occurred from smallpox over a
> > > 15-year period.
>
> > > "Germany adopted a compulsory vaccination law in 1834, and rigorously
> > > enforced re-vaccinations. Yet during the period 1871-1872 there were
> > > 125,000 deaths from smallpox. In Berlin itself 17,000 cases of
> > > smallpox occurred among the vaccinated population, of whom 2,240 were
> > > under ten years of age, and of these vaccinated children 736 died.
>
> > > "In the Philippines, global public health measures were instituted
> > > when the United States began its occupation to establish a self-
> > > reliant government in the early 1900s. The incidence of smallpox
> > > steadily declined and the compulsory vaccine campaign was credited
> > > with this dramatic reduction. However, in the years 1917 to 1919, the
> > > Philippines experienced the worst epidemic of smallpox in the
> > > country's history with over 160,000 cases and over 70,000 deaths in a
> > > completely vaccinated population. Over 43,000 deaths from smallpox
> > > occurred in 1919 alone. The entire population of the Philippines at
> > > the time was only 11 million.
>
> > > "Vaccine failures of this magnitude may have several causes. The
> > > vaccine used could have been defective. During that period it was
> > > difficult to verify what the vaccine actually contained. The vaccine
> > > could have been contaminated with smallpox virus and actually caused
> > > epidemics. Or vaccine critics may have been correct in asserting that
> > > Jenner's cowpox vaccine, which is essentially the same vaccine used
> > > today, simply did not work to prevent smallpox."
>
> > > Copyright 2009 Holistic Pediatric Association
>
> > Peter when you put brackets a link it will not take you to it.
> > You have to leave the brackets off.
>
> >http://www.vaccinationdebate.com/web1.html.
>
> Jan, thank you for that info. �You also reminded me that this link has
> moved to another domain, which is now: �http://www.vaclib.org/sites/debate/web1.html
>
> HNY and be well!- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

You're welcome, and same to you.
 |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Prev: Mark Robert Thorson
Next: Religious information