Vaccination a Delusion: Its Penal Enforcement a Crime: Proved by the Official Evidence in the Reports of the Royal CommissionWallace, Alfred Russel
Science
Vaccination a Delusion: Its Penal Enforcement a Crime: Proved by the Official Evidence in the Reports of the Royal Commission
Wallace, Alfred Russel
Vaccination
Here then we see that in the thoroughly vaccinated town the cases are
more than six times, and the deaths more than eight times, that of
the almost unvaccinated town, again proving that the most efficient
vaccination does not _diminish_ the number of attacks, and does not
_mitigate_ the severity of the disease, but that both these results
follow from sanitation and isolation.
Now let us see how the Commissioners, in their _Final Report_ deal with
the above facts, which are surely most vital to the very essence of the
enquiry, and the statistics relating to which have been laid before them
with a wealth of detail not equalled in any other case. Practically they
ignore it altogether. Of course I am referring to the Majority Report,
to which alone the Government and the unenlightened public are likely
to pay any attention. Even the figures above quoted as to Leicester and
Warrington are to be found only in the Report of the Minority, who also
give the case of another town, Dewsbury, which has partially rejected
vaccination, but not nearly to so large an extent as Leicester, and in
the same epidemic it stood almost exactly between unvaccinated Leicester
and well-vaccinated Warrington, thus:
Leicester had 1·1 mortality per 10,000 living
Dewsbury ” 6·7 ” ” ” ”
Warrington ” 11·8 ” ” ” ”
Here again we see that it is the unvaccinated towns that suffer least,
not the most vaccinated. The public of course have been terrorised by the
case of Gloucester, where a large default in vaccination was followed
by a very severe epidemic of small-pox. The Majority Report refers to
this in par. 373, intending to hold it up as a warning, but strangely
enough in so important a document, say the reverse of what they mean to
say, giving to it “very little,” instead of “very much” small-pox. This
case, however, has really nothing whatever to do with the question at
issue, because, although anti-vaccinators maintain that vaccination has
not the least effect in preventing or mitigating small-pox, they do _not_
maintain that the _absence_ of vaccination prevents it. What they urge
is, that sanitation and isolation are the effective and only preventives,
and it was because Leicester attended thoroughly to these matters, and
Gloucester wholly neglected them that the one suffered so little and the
other so much in the recent epidemic. On this subject every enquirer
should read the summary of the facts given in the Minority Report,
paragraph 261.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account