The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1893-09-29
ANTI-VACCINATION STATISTICS.
More Proof That Vaccination Is Not a
Safeguard Against Smallpox.

To the Editor OF the Indianapolis Journal:
In your Wednesday issue DR.. Kennedy.
of Shelby Vile, OK plains why the one Keller
item of statistics. Cited by me among many
others on Monday. is not considered thor.
Oughly reliable. and / am glad that he has
done so. for the friends of anti. vaccination
in this part of tho world have no desire or
need TO doctor" or manufacture statistics
showing that vaccination was not q safe.
guard against smallpox. whatever the
ststisticians In Austria may nave lone in
that instance.
The real question at issue is not whether
the little set of Keller statistics. merely
cited by me-and not LAID great stress
upon" as he states-are relia bic or not. but
is whether or no vaccination is o safe
guard against smallpox. No friend
of humanity can more than my self
regret that this fancied benefactiOn to
mankind must be branded q fraud and
a delusion. but if that DO q truth.
why be afraid to. acknowledge 1t suchf
Since all must &c that II person
can have smallpox more than once, is 1t not
presumptIve evidence that If smallpox
itself does not protect vaccination cannot
do sol
Please allow me to n more statistics
against vaccination in addition to and en-
tirely different from those In my article of
Sunday:
The Doctors ancient history regarding
the had been" of smallpox u hundred and
more years ago, before the introduction OF
vaccination, in last Sundays Journal was
interesting. but musty. and really has little
bearing on the question In hand. Getting
nearer our times, ne says that in the
Prnsslsn army there has not been q ingle
death from smallpox since 1874. when the
com puisOry vaccination law was intro
dCced." Granting that this Is true. whether
IL is or not. this immunity was due to good
fortune OF wise sanitary precautions. not
To vaccination. because the records show
that during the Franco-PrussiaD war there
were %. 469 cases of smallpox In the
French army in one year tlSI0-1). all
of the soldiers having been cOmpuls0rlly
v~acCinateG, most OF them for the second or
third time. As the unvaocinated do not all
take smallpox when exposed to it., their
good condition protecting them, we should
not. as keen medical men, enormously con
clude that because the vaccinated do not
take smallpox that it was the vaccination
that protected them.
Ii the Doctor doubts the Keller Austrian
statistics. let him try his brain on this
from Berlin, where vaccination Is compul-
sorry: There were 5.0-5 deaths FROM small
pOX In that city IN 1871. Or this: In Ba-
varia. where none but the newly born es-
capped vaccination then, the State Depart.
ment records chow that In 1871 thore were
50. 743 cases OF smallpox, and 20, 429 of them
had been v~acclnated. A peculiar point To
be here noted IL thus shown: In Cologne.
the city OF good and bad smeIls. in 1870.
173 v%acclnated persons took the smallpox
before one unvacclnated one got 1t: in
LeignitZ. in 1S7I. 224. and In Bonn. IN 1870.
tOrty-twO. The same popularity Is report
Ell III relation TO tie present epidemic at
Muncle. this State. with the addition that
the last one to die was al unvaccinated
man. all the previous fatalities having
been those who had been vacoinated.
In England vaccination has lonG heen
compulsory; 30 her hospital smallpox
statistics are worth citing as evidences:
Deptford, 1878. smallpox patients with one
vaccination mark. 3l7; two marks. 3S4:
three or more marks. 447. Homerton, 1917.
one mark, 1,O42; two marks. 1859; three
or more marks. 1.2jl. Fulham. 1873. one
mark. 149: two marks, $50; three OF more
marks, 202. Metropolitan, lo10-2, one mark.
1924; two marks. LIZ; three or more
marks, 1.677. So We see that instead of pre-.
vention, as a general thing the more vac
ciDatlon marks there are the more small
pox among the v~accinated there Is. In one
year uo7l-2l there were In London LIZA
cases OF smallpox among persons that had
been vacclDated, aDd the London Lancet,
in speaking of the IL. 000 deaths from small
pOX that year In England and Wales, said
that more than ID .G00 v%accipated persons
had had the smallpox In that epidemic.
In that same year t1S7l) Milan had II. l09
. ~ O.J "0N> -
CnvaccIDeted.
The London Medical Observer. as long
ago as 1Sl0. published the particulars re-
gardiDg 555 cases of smallpox after vaccIna-
ton. many of them having been done by
JenBer himself. Also about nInety.sevcn
fatal cases that had been vaccInRted, aud
of $50 cases or injury resulting therefrOm;
while the RegistrRr-general. of sweden. In
1856. reported that the preventive effect
OF vaccination is little OF none. or the work
ings of tue system arc highly defective"
This latter after forty years OF compulsory
vaccination. SIhe London Society for the
Abolition of Compulsory Vaccination. in
1852. found 2S6 physicians in England will
inn to ex press a public opinion on the sub
ject. and out of these 2l6 were against vac
clnatlon.
But Americans will perhaps prefer some
statistics of American manufacture. even
though We are not a pest-riddeD country.
In Baltimore. IN lSS2. there were 40
cases of smallpox, of which 2.S53 had
been v%acclnated. mostly under German
compulsory laws. Boston in 1850 had 4.Uoo
GASES Of smallpox among persons who had
been vaccInated. The United States
frigate Independence had 10 cases OF
smallpox In 1856, Fleet Surgeon Whelan re-
porting that many of the sick men had
good vaccination marks. The United
States steamship jamestown had thirty
one cases IN 1854. and all had been officially
vaccinated before leaving port. and many
long before besides. The United states
steamship Franklin mad siXty-one cases in
lStu. the trst one being a sailor with a good
vaccination mark on his arm. The officers
and men had been vacoinated three times
on the cruise. The North Carolina shipped
n crew. OF whom nearly all had been vac
cinated or had had smallpox. and all were
vaccInated four times on the cruise, yet
151 OF the crow had smallpox. The report
of the New York city health department.
for lSs0-l called attention To the failure of
vaccination to prevent SMALLPOX. and sand:
The facts must lead to- rein, estigstion
of the whole subiect of vaccination and of
its claims as u protecting agent"
The mneh-lauded Jsnner. who at tho
time Of his discovery" OF N what