Immunization Controversy Archives

Food for thought. (Archive in immunizations.) smallpox vaccinations

[ Immunization Controversy Archive ]
[ Main Archives Page ] [ Glossary/Index ]
[ FAQ ] [ Recommended Books ] [ Bulletin Board ]
   Search this site!
 
        

Food for thought. (Archive in immunizations.) smallpox vaccinations

Posted by Walt Stoll on December 11, 2002 at 06:50:32:

Comments?

"After an intensive four-year effort to vaccinate the entire
population between the ages of 2 and 50, the Chief Medical Officer
of England announced in May 1871 that 97.5% had been vaccinated. In
the following year, 1872, England experienced its worst ever
smallpox epidemic which claimed 44,840 lives.In the Philippines,
prior to U.S. takeover in 1905, case mortality [death rate] from
smallpox was about 10%.In 1918-1919, with over 95% of the population
vaccinated, the worst epidemic in the Philippines' history occurred
resulting in a case mortality of 65%.The 1920 Report of the
Philippines Health Service [stated] 'hundreds of thousands of people
were yearly vaccinated with the most unfortunate result that the
1918 epidemic looks prima facie as a flagrant failure of the classic
immunization toward future epidemics.'"4

From a much larger article, about understanding immunity, on Misty's wonderful website at seaching-alternatives@yahoogroups.com

Namaste`

Walt



Re: Food for thought. (Archive in immunizations.) smallpox vaccinations

Posted by Joanie on December 11, 2002 at 07:30:10:

In Reply to: Food for thought. (Archive in immunizations.) smallpox vaccinations posted by Walt Stoll on December 11, 2002 at 06:50:32:

Rocket Science???? Where's Rockethealer Jim when we need him!!!

Do you think offering bribes to those giving the shots will work? :o)

Namaste`

Joanie



Re: Food for thought. (Archive in immunizations.) smallpox vaccinations

Posted by ~CT on December 11, 2002 at 12:48:36:

In Reply to: Food for thought. (Archive in immunizations.) smallpox vaccinations posted by Walt Stoll on December 11, 2002 at 06:50:32:

My neighbor, who is a war veteran, has had the vaccination twice and he said he would take it again if it became available.

I sent him the above information and will be curious to see if he changes his mind.

I don't know what I'm going to do if the government makes it mandatory for children to be "immunized". I think some of us were just lucky when we had this as kids.

Is there any research or statistics from immunizations done in the 50's and 60's in the US?



Re: Food for thought. (Archive in immunizations.) smallpox vaccinations

Posted by R. on December 11, 2002 at 14:30:44:

In Reply to: Re: Food for thought. (Archive in immunizations.) smallpox vaccinations posted by Joanie on December 11, 2002 at 07:30:10:

That was one of my ideas. Second was to just leave the town for a while.

Follow Ups:


Re: Food for thought. (Archive in immunizations.) smallpox vaccinations

Posted by R. on December 11, 2002 at 14:32:30:

In Reply to: Re: Food for thought. (Archive in immunizations.) smallpox vaccinations posted by ~CT on December 11, 2002 at 12:48:36:

Negative side effects of vaccinations are underreported in the USA, so you can't rely on that data even if it exists.



Re: Food for thought. (Archive in immunizations.) smallpox vaccinations

Posted by R. on December 11, 2002 at 14:42:19:

In Reply to: Food for thought. (Archive in immunizations.) smallpox vaccinations posted by Walt Stoll on December 11, 2002 at 06:50:32:

You are asking for comments??? Actually you, Walt, owe comments! What you quoted supports what I'd said -- that the vaccine is useless, or, at least, there's no good evidence that the vaccine was effective in preventing outbreasks, and there's good evidence that was actually harmful. So how do you justify your belief that "cowpox vaccination was responsible for the eradication of smallpox from the world"? I see no logic here. You seem ambivalent.

I'd hate to discuss this here and on Misty's board.



Re: Food for thought. (Archive in immunizations.) smallpox vaccinations

Posted by PeterB on December 11, 2002 at 20:25:51:

In Reply to: Food for thought. (Archive in immunizations.) smallpox vaccinations posted by Walt Stoll on December 11, 2002 at 06:50:32:

Forced vaccinations would be unconstitutional in my view, since it prescribes medication without patient consent (same as with fluoridation.) The mass vaccination program, IMO, is just another tool for generating fear of the "enemy." It has nothing to do with health.



apples and oranges comparison?

Posted by ~CT on December 11, 2002 at 21:11:37:

In Reply to: Re: Food for thought. (Archive in immunizations.) smallpox vaccinations posted by R. on December 11, 2002 at 14:32:30:

Comparing 1871 statistics with current medical advances in vaccine is like comparing the performance of a 1933 Model T Ford to a new 2003 Cadalliac. They are not in the same ball park.

Comments? (this is the response from my neighbor who has had two of the vaccinations, many years ago, along with hundreds of thousands of other servicemen/women)



Re: apples and oranges comparison?

Posted by R. on December 12, 2002 at 05:30:21:

In Reply to: apples and oranges comparison? posted by ~CT on December 11, 2002 at 21:11:37:

Maybe. But what exact ball park are they in, do you know? I don't. All I know that current statistics are not to be trusted. But that is just about side effects. My most important point is that there's enough evidence that the vaccine didn't do much good, if anything at all, to curb epidemics. If it's as effective as many believe, how do they explain events similar to those described in Walt's post?

Follow Ups:


Re: Food for thought. (Archive in immunizations.) smallpox vaccinations

Posted by R. on December 12, 2002 at 05:31:45:

In Reply to: Re: Food for thought. (Archive in immunizations.) smallpox vaccinations posted by PeterB on December 11, 2002 at 20:25:51:

Of course! But they still fluoridate, don't they?



Re: Food for thought. (Archive in immunizations.) smallpox vaccinations

Posted by PeterB on December 12, 2002 at 08:13:41:

In Reply to: Re: Food for thought. (Archive in immunizations.) smallpox vaccinations posted by R. on December 12, 2002 at 05:31:45:

that's my point, R, we have a history of lunacy at the political ($) level.

Follow Ups:


Re: Food for thought. (Archive in immunizations.) smallpox vaccinations

Posted by Walt Stoll on December 12, 2002 at 08:23:01:

In Reply to: Re: Food for thought. (Archive in immunizations.) smallpox vaccinations posted by R. on December 11, 2002 at 14:42:19:

Thanks, R.

I know you have noticed: The world is not mainly black and white but shades of grey.

What is your explanation for the total eradication of the smallpox virus from our planet? I would be really interested in hearing.

Walt



Food for thought - Vaccination: Not the kind of food I want my mind to munch on

Posted by Gregory on December 12, 2002 at 10:31:34:

In Reply to: Re: Food for thought. (Archive in immunizations.) smallpox vaccinations posted by Walt Stoll on December 12, 2002 at 08:23:01:



Follow Ups:


Re: Food for thought. (Archive in immunizations.) smallpox vaccinations

Posted by Confused on December 12, 2002 at 11:42:52:

In Reply to: Re: Food for thought. (Archive in immunizations.) smallpox vaccinations posted by PeterB on December 11, 2002 at 20:25:51:

I'm confused about something. Maybe my line of thinking has an error in it, but..... (assuming vaccination works)

Why would an "evildoer" release a plague that could easily spread to their people and all over the world on others besides Americans? Especially releasing it in their own country against our troups? Not likely. Nobody in their country is immunized. The only people who will be immunized are servicemen and emergency health workers. The rest of us here in the U.S. will have a choice whether to get it or not. Doesn't that kind of smack of us releasing it on them and then accusing them of bio-warfare?

What do you guys think?



Re: Food for thought. (Archive in immunizations.) smallpox vaccinations

Posted by PeterB on December 12, 2002 at 17:49:17:

In Reply to: Re: Food for thought. (Archive in immunizations.) smallpox vaccinations posted by Confused on December 12, 2002 at 11:42:52:

if the strain is unknown it could be tantamount to a nuclear cloud for which there is NO defense. It could kill millions worldwide. How do we know SH has NOT immunized his troops? the powers controlling Bush already know the answers to these questions, of course, while death and destruction are tools of the NWO buildout.



Re: Food for thought. (Archive in immunizations.) smallpox vaccinations

Posted by PeterB on December 12, 2002 at 17:55:19:

In Reply to: Re: Food for thought. (Archive in immunizations.) smallpox vaccinations posted by Walt Stoll on December 12, 2002 at 08:23:01:

I admit I don't know the answer. did it simply burn itself out like any other virus?



Re: Food for thought. (Archive in immunizations.) smallpox vaccinations

Posted by Confused on December 12, 2002 at 18:02:59:

In Reply to: Re: Food for thought. (Archive in immunizations.) smallpox vaccinations posted by PeterB on December 12, 2002 at 17:49:17:

You're right. We don't know if SH immunized his troops or not. We can pretty much assume that the entire nation is not immunized. And what about surrounding countries?

I've heard that theory of massive death tolls for the NWO, but what would that accomplish? I thought the PTB (so to speak) are very happy with having the masses to make money off of. How else have the elite been able to remain that way. The more to use and abuse, the better, right? Exactly how would wiping out masses of people benefit anyone (as far as the NWO goes)?



Re: Food for thought. (Archive in immunizations.) smallpox vaccinations

Posted by PeterB on December 12, 2002 at 22:27:35:

In Reply to: Re: Food for thought. (Archive in immunizations.) smallpox vaccinations posted by Confused on December 12, 2002 at 18:02:59:

its an excellent question. STep a little further back and take in a bigger picture. For one, the NWO strategists have a need for greater control of the global political system and its players. Casualties are a small price to pay for that. In most respects, human capital is much cheaper than natural resources and control of political systems because so much of the human population is under-developed anyway. And how do you develop them QUICKLY without those things? There are always opportunities and time to grow your base of consumption. The NWO elite are very wealthy and powerful and see no immediate benefit in waiting for someone to go through school to get a degree, so they can get a good paying job, pay taxes and indirectly fund political corruption and their counterpart corporate lobbyists who control the economic machine. Not that it isn't a gravy train. But these individuals are in a position to make quantum leaps in ACQUISITION of target resources such as OIL, GOLD, DRUG TRADE, whatever they want. And all without rules. Its apparent that the NWO is advancing its GLOBAL program and using agression to accomplish its immediate and long-term goals. No population or nation is immune to the fall-out of a winner-take-all strategy -- its not about individual nations or their populations, but re-arranging the board and moving the pieces into a better position for your endgame. What about economic activity and output? Those are liabilities in the short-term, and they haven't figured out a way to control the boom-and-bust cycles anyway. That's because they created the conditions for those cycles, but why reflect on that when you can extol the virtues of a Federal Reserve and fiat currency? Besides, they're the same thing! It IS important to have national leaders talk a good game because an orderly exit from a burning building is always better than one where people get trampled to death. Isn't that thoughtful? Not that it works 100% of the time (Venezuela, Argentina, AMERICA?), but you can't have everything.

The U.S. is moving along a deflationary spiral not because it was truly unavoidable (in an HONEST economic system), but because economic cycles serve a purpose and down-cycles serve exactly the SAME purpose for those in a position to see what's coming. Believe me, they see it VERY clearly. Remember that lots of money was made during 911 when the markets temporarily collapsed. There are also reports that certain political figures IN THE U.S. (Mayor of Chicago for one) got calls from federal agents the day before the attacks, warning them to avoid travel on 9/11.

To believe that Bush is planning to attack Iraq as a Protector of Freedom is to believe the Supreme Court represents the U.S. electorate. (By the way, I wasn't for Gore.) The issues are not weapons of mass destruction, but the acquisition of natural resources and political clout that will help catapult the NWO into a seamless global power system. In that system, individual rights are meaningless, in fact an inconvenience. Corporations themselves become individuals (they already have in U.S. parlance and legal code), so be aware that MONEY and POWER are the endgame and not personal freedom or the pursuit of happiness.

Of course, the NWO will collapse under the weight of its own corruption one day, the same way as all empires throughout human history. A lot of destruction will probably preface that outcome. And a lot of amazing revelations, too.



Re: Food for thought. (Archive in immunizations.) smallpox vaccinations

Posted by Confused on December 13, 2002 at 12:15:01:

In Reply to: Re: Food for thought. (Archive in immunizations.) smallpox vaccinations posted by PeterB on December 12, 2002 at 22:27:35:

Thanks PeterB. Everything you said made perfect sense. I have always thought of the boom or bust cycles in the way you have described them. I may have not grasped the entire meaning of your message, but I still feel that population reduction would not be a goal or a good thing for the NWO.

Acquisition of resources means that they have to have a mighty populace to consume those items. In the bust times, it's the elite and rich who can afford to scoop up the property and resources that others have lost through the bust. In the boom times, the people who lost in the bust rejuvinate and buy back the property and resources at a much higher price than what they lost it at.

Real Estate is the example that comes to mind. I saw it in 1987 and over the last 3 years. Property prices were/are so high and people were buying like mad, not paying attention to how the prices have just inflated to a ridiculous level. Then will come the bust period and you can pick up property at ridiculously low prices and repos abound, but nobody is buying (except the "investors") because they can't afford to buy, or they have such bad financial records that the banks won't loan them the money. In those bust times, rentals skyrocket.

Maybe this is too simplistic a view, but even with your explanation, I just don't see how a population reduction would benefit their goals. It would benefit mankind in general, maybe, by balancing things out.



Re: Food for thought. (Archive in immunizations.) smallpox vaccinations

Posted by
thessa on December 13, 2002 at 12:37:12:

In Reply to: Food for thought. (Archive in immunizations.) smallpox vaccinations posted by Walt Stoll on December 11, 2002 at 06:50:32:

I'm enjoying the comments here.
Here are a few more articles on the subjects discussed in this thread. I particularly like the one written from the natural hygienist's point of view.
http://www.tetrahedron.org/articles/vaccine_awareness/smallpox_vaccine_risks.html



Re: Food for thought. (Archive in immunizations.) smallpox vaccinations

Posted by PeterB on December 13, 2002 at 17:35:21:

In Reply to: Re: Food for thought. (Archive in immunizations.) smallpox vaccinations posted by Confused on December 13, 2002 at 12:15:01:

you seem to think my comments are about a campaign of controlled killing, and you use the term "population reduction." I've only referred to casualties of "war."

When Hitler strategized to conquer the major world powers, he didn't worry about losing some Germans to the campaign. The NWO isn't worried about a few million casualties either. Again, human capital is cheap. We procreate with or without economic stimulus. The issue is political power systems and control of resources. EVERYTHING is expendable to some extent if it serves to deliver those items. NATO is a power system. The EU is a power system. The Catholic Church is a power system. OPEC is a power system. The NWO strategists are hooked into all of them and have tremendous influence over each one.

When you play chess, do you ever sacrifice a pawn or even a bishop or rook to advance your endgame?



Re: Food for thought. (Archive in immunizations.) smallpox vaccinations

Posted by Less Confused on December 13, 2002 at 18:52:02:

In Reply to: Re: Food for thought. (Archive in immunizations.) smallpox vaccinations posted by PeterB on December 13, 2002 at 17:35:21:

See, I didn't grasp the whole of what you were talking about. With that misunderstanding cleared up, I totally agree with you.

I probably didn't read your first post carefully enough and when it was mentioned about population loss, my mind automatically shifted to what I have been hearing about lately. That is, mass population reduction through silent genocide, through the medical system, chem trails, highly secret operations, etc.



Re: Food for thought. (Archive in immunizations.) smallpox vaccinations

Posted by Walt Stoll on December 14, 2002 at 09:32:35:

In Reply to: Re: Food for thought. (Archive in immunizations.) smallpox vaccinations posted by PeterB on December 12, 2002 at 17:55:19:

Hi, PeterB.

To my knowledge the eradication of this virus from our planet is the first and only one I know of.

Viruses do not "burn themselves out unless their natural host disappears. This is what happened with smallpox. The pool of susceptibles simply got too small (because of vaccination) to support it's existance.

Walt



Re: Food for thought. (Archive in immunizations.) smallpox vaccinations

Posted by PeterB on December 14, 2002 at 09:50:22:

In Reply to: Re: Food for thought. (Archive in immunizations.) smallpox vaccinations posted by Less Confused on December 13, 2002 at 18:52:02:

yes, there are those areas to consider as well. Hitler was certainly pursuing a controlled de-population campaign on top of world conquest. its very possible that others in positions of political power have wanted to use controlled de-population methods in secret, and for all i know, they have. Dr. Ed Graves claims to have more than the smoking gun with regard to viral technology and the construction of the viral agents that cause AIDS. He's an interesting guy, I think. You've probably seen his website, but heres a link in case you haven't. LINK As for chemtrails, i haven't spent a lot of time on this, but its very interesting. What do you think?

Follow Ups:


Re: Food for thought. (Archive in immunizations.) smallpox vaccinations

Posted by PeterB on December 14, 2002 at 10:01:36:

In Reply to: Re: Food for thought. (Archive in immunizations.) smallpox vaccinations posted by Walt Stoll on December 14, 2002 at 09:32:35:

biology was just about my worst subject. Interesting also that your commentary with stats on vaccine failure rates is not more commonly known. Thanks Walt.

Follow Ups:


Food for thought. (Archive in terrorism.) smallpox vaccinations

Posted by Walt Stoll on December 14, 2002 at 15:54:36:

In Reply to: Re: Food for thought. (Archive in immunizations.) smallpox vaccinations posted by thessa on December 13, 2002 at 12:37:12:

Thanks, Thessa.

I especially agree with the idea that serious wellness is our best defense and the best guarantee of survival even should we actually get smallpox.

I have been giving publis lectures on the subject of terrorism emphasizing this exact point.

Namaste`

Walt

Follow Ups:


Re: Food for thought. (Archive in immunizations.) smallpox vaccinations

Posted by R. on December 15, 2002 at 02:17:13:

In Reply to: Re: Food for thought. (Archive in immunizations.) smallpox vaccinations posted by Walt Stoll on December 14, 2002 at 09:32:35:

The spanish flu is not around anymore, is it? As PeterB, I also think that smallpox's cycle was simply over. I also don't think it can be proven that the virus disappeared from Earth. What we know to have happen is stoppage smallpox breakouts. We don't know whether the virus is not lurking somewhere. But even outbreaks may still be happening. Here's a quote from Dr. Raymond Obomsawin's work (you can get it from Catalog of The Alternative Medical Therapies Library): "In turning to recognized textbooks on human virology and vertebrate viruses we find that attention has been given since 1970 to a disease called "monkeypox," which is said to be "clinically indistinguishable from smallpox." Cases of this disease have been found in Zaire, Cameroon, Nigeria, Ivory Coast, Liberia, and Sierra Leone (by May 1983, 101 cases have been reported). It is observed that " . . . the existence of a virus that can cause clinical smallpox is disturbing, and the situation is being closely monitored."119 (For a highly detailed account of the history of this disease and efforts to eradicate it, which further corroborates these observations, see, Razzell P., The Conquest of Smallpox, Caliban Books, United Kingdom, 1977.)". So, are you sure that smallpox was eradicated?

You said: "The pool of susceptibles simply got too small (because of vaccination) to support it's existance."

Are you saying again that the vaccine boosted peoples' resistance to smallpox? You are saying THAT after posting a quote describing increases of smallpox cases and deaths AFTER vaccinations? When you get the online work I just mentioned, you will see a graph that "reveals that in England and Wales there was a continuing decline in the annual death rate from smallpox, with a reduction in mortality of roughly 300 per million to virtually 0, taking place in the 60 year period following the middle of the last [1800's] century. This table further illustrates that the progressive rate of decline was severely disrupted--with a roughly 275 percent increase in mortality from the disease--occurring immediately after smallpox vaccination laws were enforced."

Here's another quote from the same document: "Speaking at a 1973 environmental conference in Brussels, Professor George Dick admitted that in recent decades, 75 percent of those that have contracted smallpox in Britain, have had prior a history of vaccination. In that "only 40%" of children were vaccinated (and at most 10 percent of adults), such figures clearly indicate that the vaccinated--as in the much earlier historical record--continue to show a higher tendency to contract the disease. Dick also admitted that smallpox had been eradicated in certain tropical countries without mass vaccination.113 (Table VIII reveals that in the 16 year period preceding the year the WHO eradication campaign was launched--38 additional countries had ceased to report any smallpox cases.)"

So far, Walt, you have not provided ANY evidence that supports your belief in the smallpox vaccine. Don't want to be confused with facts, do you? he-he-he



Re: Food for thought. (Archive in immunizations.) smallpox vaccinations

Posted by PeterB on December 15, 2002 at 15:11:52:

In Reply to: Re: Food for thought. (Archive in immunizations.) smallpox vaccinations posted by R. on December 15, 2002 at 02:17:13:

I believe Walt was pointing out the substantial (but not total) FAILURE of vaccination in his original post. His later comment seemed to be saying that a combination of vaccination and the demise of smallpox hosts ultimately extinguished it. Based on what i've read in these posts (the extent of my research) it appears that MANY fatalities were associated with both receiving and NOT receiving the vaccine.



Re: Food for thought. (Archive in immunizations.) smallpox vaccinations

Posted by R. on December 15, 2002 at 18:15:36:

In Reply to: Re: Food for thought. (Archive in immunizations.) smallpox vaccinations posted by PeterB on December 15, 2002 at 15:11:52:

I think his original post was intended to stir a discussion and draw readers' attention to Misty's board. He obviously believes that the vaccine has helped, regardless of the contents of the post.

What do you mean by "associated"? That fatalities were caused/increased by not receiving the vaccine? That people were dying because they received the vaccine and because they didn't? Would care to explain that?

Evidence really supports a statement that the vaccine actually was detrimental.

Follow Ups:


Re: Food for thought. (Archive in immunizations.) smallpox vaccinations

Posted by Walt Stoll on December 17, 2002 at 07:31:06:

In Reply to: Re: Food for thought. (Archive in immunizations.) smallpox vaccinations posted by R. on December 15, 2002 at 02:17:13:

R.

I think it is time for you to start studying virology and let us know what you learn.

Influenza viruses, like cold viruses, are a totally different breed of cat. They regularly change their outer coat and so their antigenicity. That is why a new vaccine has to be produced every year and no vaccine has yet been made for "colds". So much for the "Spanish Flu" example.

I also agree that conventional medical paradigm is pretty lame about fully explaining anything like this. Who knows what will finaly be decided? Perhaps the terrorists will force enough research money, and professional personnel, to be spent to finally help us understand. This might even happen in our lifetimes.

For example, the immune system (now known to be the most important "system" in the body/mind) languished on the back shelf until AIDS came along and forced significant research.

In the meantime, if my smallpox titer is nonexistant, I will have to think about whether to get vaccinated again.

Namaste`

Walt



Re: Food for thought. (Archive in immunizations.) smallpox vaccinations

Posted by R. on December 17, 2002 at 13:40:02:

In Reply to: Re: Food for thought. (Archive in immunizations.) smallpox vaccinations posted by Walt Stoll on December 17, 2002 at 07:31:06:

I used to Spanish Flu to point out that there seem to be cycles for diseases, and like Spanish Flu, smallpox might have gone away a similar way.

Make sure you get your will ready before you get the smallpox vaccine.

Interestingly, some physicians and researchers (they have reported in CDC) think of the following as myths:

1. Smallpox is highly contagious and could spread rapidly, killing millions
2. Smallpox can be spread by casual contact with an infected person
3. The death rate from smallpox is thought to be 30%
4. There is no treatment for smallpox

and of course...

5. The smallpox vaccine will protect a person from getting the disease

Read

Follow Ups:


[ Immunization Controversy Archive ]
[ Main Archives Page ] [ Glossary/Index ]
[ FAQ ] [ Recommended Books ] [ Bulletin Board ]
   Search this site!