| |
 |
|
|
Science Forum Index » Immunology Forum » [1912 Book] LEICESTER: SANITATION versus VACCINATION
Page 1 of 1
|
| Author |
Message |
| JOHN |
 Posted: Sat Apr 07, 2007 3:15 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| David Wright |
| Posted: Sat Apr 07, 2007 3:36 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
In article <TtWdnaGM-K5BZorbnZ2dnUVZ8t-nnZ2d@bt.com>,
JOHN <john@btinternet.com> wrote:
Quote: http://www.whale.to/a/biggs_b.html
The Leicester experiment of rejecting vaccination over 30-40 years exposed
smallpox vaccination completely
That might be relevant, except it has nothing to do with the
smallpox vaccine in use today.
-- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net
These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct.
"HPV shots don't cause promiscuity. Tequila shots do." -- Bill Maher |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Peter Moran |
| Posted: Sat Apr 07, 2007 6:22 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"JOHN" <john@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:TtWdnaGM-K5BZorbnZ2dnUVZ8t-nnZ2d@bt.com...
Quote: http://www.whale.to/a/biggs_b.html
The Leicester experiment of rejecting vaccination over 30-40 years exposed
smallpox vaccination completely
The Leicester method, as described in this material, had nothing to do with
either sanitation or vaccination. Cases of smallpox still occurred in
Leicester, as would be expected in any unvaccinated population of that era,
but it was found that epidemics could be limited by early isolation of
cases and contacts. I quote ---
"As the plan which I adopted in the removal of these (small-pox) cases is
novel, and may be found useful by Officers of Health in other towns for
preventing the spread of the disease, I may be pardoned if I again draw
attention to it. In any house where a small-pox case occurred, I endeavoured
to impress the inmates with the fact that the removal of all the members of
the family to the hospital was the best course to adopt, not only as
regarded their own individual welfare, but also that of the town at large.
And I am glad to say that all complied with my request, left their infected
habitations, and became inmates of the hospital, Altogether, 22 unaffected
cases were thus admitted into quarantine, and of these 3, after admission,
sickened. . . . The epidemic had got firm footing in the town, as it
expressed itself in no less than six places. . . .
"The suppression of what might otherwise have proved a widespread epidemic,
attended with great fatality, was entirely due to the early information
received of the cases affected, and the promptitude observed in their
removal.
"As immediate reporting of the cases is of paramount importance in their
limitation, it is most desirable that the Corporation of Leicester should
endeavour to obtain from Parliament authority to compel the registration of
infectious disease within the Borough."
Sanitation, as the word is understood today, involves providing clean water
and effective human waste disposal and is only of use in preventing enteric
pathogens such as typhoid and cholera.
Peter Moran |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| JOHN |
| Posted: Sun Apr 08, 2007 5:04 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"Peter Moran" <pmoran@bordernet.com.au> wrote in message
news:4618278b$0$27883$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
read the book, but it would be too much for an Allopath (vaccinator) to see
through his brainwashing. But fun to see.
2,000 less deaths compared to their high vaccination years, and that was
just babies under 5.
"The town of Leicester rejected vaccination in favour of sanitation. Her
experience during the past fifty years makes nonsense of the claims of the
pro-vaccinists. When her population was thoroughly vaccinated she suffered
severely from smallpox. As vaccination declined to one per cent of the
infants born, smallpox disappeared altogether."---- Lilly Loat [Book 1951]
The Truth About Vaccination and Immunization |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| JOHN |
| Posted: Sun Apr 08, 2007 10:20 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
smallpox was mainly a disease of poor sanitation, which was why it was rife
in cities but major parts of the country could go for decades without a
case.
While vaccination obvioulsy spread the disease as 75% of vaccination was arm
to arm in 1890, and epidemics followed high vaccination rates, as the stats
show eg http://www.whale.to/a/biggs_graph_g.html
"Sewers introduced into Leicester, 1851. Sewer ventilation
introduced,1881."
Mr. Alfred Milnes, M.A., in his masterly paper, printed in the Journal of
the Royal Statistical Society, Vol. LX., Part III., September, 1897, shows
conclusively that the reduction in infant mortality is entirely due to
improved sanitation, children being peculiarly susceptible to the effect of
insanitary conditions. He has extracted from the 45th and 55th Reports of
the Registrar-General the annual average death-rate per million living in
the decade 1871-80 and in the decade 1881-90. For the towns of Whitechapel
and Hampstead, averaging these two decades, it appears that the mortality
for all ages is about 7,300 per million living greater in Whitechapel than
in Hampstead, while for those under five years old the mortality of
Whitechapel is about 37,500 per million living more than the mortality in
Hampstead, showing that the conditons adverse to life in Whitechapel are in
the case of infants under five years five times more fatal than they are
upon the population taken as a whole. These figures show that improved
sanitation is quite sufficient to account for the reduced fatality from
small-pox in children
it is remarkable that allopaths like Moran believe that cutting pus into
babies would save them from poor sanitation!
Such is allopathic brainwashing
and case mortality is another red flag http://www.whale.to/a/case.html
Biggs has done a nice graph to show that
http://www.whale.to/a/biggs_graph_c.html
and another kicker is the fact Syndneham had a 1-2% mortality
http://www.whale.to/a/image/hoffer7.jpg 150 years before vaccination, which
sums up the allopaths
but they don't like cheap effective medicine as they would be out of a job |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Peter Moran |
| Posted: Sun Apr 08, 2007 7:42 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"JOHN" <john@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:n4KdndooGqizlYTbnZ2dnUVZ8qPinZ2d@bt.com...
Quote: smallpox was mainly a disease of poor sanitation, which was why it was
rife in cities but major parts of the country could go for decades without
a case.
While vaccination obvioulsy spread the disease as 75% of vaccination was
arm to arm in 1890, and epidemics followed high vaccination rates, as the
stats show eg http://www.whale.to/a/biggs_graph_g.html
"Sewers introduced into Leicester, 1851. Sewer ventilation
introduced,1881."
Mr. Alfred Milnes, M.A., in his masterly paper, printed in the Journal of
the Royal Statistical Society, Vol. LX., Part III., September, 1897, shows
conclusively that the reduction in infant mortality is entirely due to
improved sanitation, children being peculiarly susceptible to the effect
of insanitary conditions. He has extracted from the 45th and 55th Reports
of the Registrar-General the annual average death-rate per million living
in the decade 1871-80 and in the decade 1881-90. For the towns of
Whitechapel and Hampstead, averaging these two decades, it appears that
the mortality for all ages is about 7,300 per million living greater in
Whitechapel than in Hampstead, while for those under five years old the
mortality of Whitechapel is about 37,500 per million living more than the
mortality in Hampstead, showing that the conditons adverse to life in
Whitechapel are in the case of infants under five years five times more
fatal than they are upon the population taken as a whole. These figures
show that improved sanitation is quite sufficient to account for the
reduced fatality from small-pox in children
it is remarkable that allopaths like Moran believe that cutting pus into
babies would save them from poor sanitation!
Typical standard of antivac rethoric. Remakable for the fact that I have
just stated that sanitation helps prevent enteric infections, the dominant
cause of paediatric mortality on a year by year basis.
It does nothing for smallpox, which spread via close patient contact. .
John, before you slink off, explain to me how vaccination eliminated
smallpox from STILL poorly sanitised countries in Africa and Asia if it is
not effective. This fact blows your thesis entirely out of the water.
PM |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| JOHN |
| Posted: Mon Apr 09, 2007 3:49 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"Peter Moran" <pmoran@bordernet.com.au> wrote in message
news:46198bd0$0$5745$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
Quote:
Typical standard of antivac rethoric. Remakable for the fact that I have
just stated that sanitation helps prevent enteric infections, the dominant
cause of paediatric mortality on a year by year basis.
It does nothing for smallpox, which spread via close patient contact. .
John, before you slink off, explain to me how vaccination eliminated
smallpox from STILL poorly sanitised countries in Africa and Asia if it is
not effective. This fact blows your thesis entirely out of the water.
PM
Typical Allopath, I was on Leicester and smallpox and he is off on enteric
disease and Africa, and you are the slinker offer as I recall. I have to
admire your attempt to fool people that chemo is the only therapy for
cancer.
You allopaths live on the false Pastuerian disease theory so you would think
that living in filth would have no effect on smallpox and its mortality.
FACT Leicester rejected vaccination over 40 years and the smallpox death
rate went down http://www.whale.to/a/biggs_graph_g.html
compared to their high vaccination years, they lost 2,000 less babies as a
result!
"That Leicester (which was formerly classed by the Registrar-General amongst
the most unhealthy towns of the country) had an average annual death-rate in
1868-72 of 26.82 per 1,000 total population, when the percentage of
vaccinations was 91.7 to the total births; and that subsequently, when
vaccinations had fallen to 2.1 per cent, to the total births, the average
annual death-rate from all causes for 1893-97 had fallen to only 17.31 per
1,000 living, and has since gone down to 12.30.
The lesson of this table (49) is that when we pinned our faith to the
prophylactic and saving virtues of vaccination-from 1868 to 1872-no fewer
than an annual average of 239 out of every 1,000 infants born died within
twelve months of their birth. Now, having seen the error of our ways, and
discarded the nostrum, instead of 239 deaths, there is only an annual
average of 128 deaths per 1,000 births, or a decrease of 111 per thousand,
being a saving of 46 per cent. These figures represent an annual saving of
over 600 infant lives each year in Leicester.
..The saving of children's lives under five years of age is on the same
lines of progress. Whereas in the high vaccination period of 1866-72 there
were 107 deaths per thousand living at that age, now there are only 34 per
thousand, being a decrease of 73 per thousand, or a saving of 68 per cent.
This represents a saving of over 2,200 lives each year of children living
under five."--- LEICESTER: SANITATION versus VACCINATION BY J.T. BIGGS J.P.
But what would you expect with vaccinbe lymph, and I notice you have ignored
the vaccine lymph thread, I would be interested to know how you explain away
the first 100 years of that quackery |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| JOHN |
| Posted: Mon Apr 09, 2007 4:52 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
the smallpox story is an excellent example of George Orwell's dictum: "Who
controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls
the past."
For they have absolute control of the present (media and government), so can
say anything about the past and get away with it, even if it contains such
outrageous absurdities/quackery as vaccine lymph. And it gives an
indication of their control that far back, that they can infect millions
with vaccine lympth and get away with it. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
|
Page 1 of 1
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
The time now is Mon Dec 01, 2008 10:21 pm
|
|