The Lambertville record. [volume] (Lambertville, N.J.) 1872-1968, 1894-04-04
(7ffE;alIIs}YS,,%4>IELQ
WEDNESDAY. APRIL 4, 1894.
ON REVACCINATION.
WHY 1T is NECESSARY AND THE
VALUE 1T POSSESSES.

VALUE IL FOOOEOOCO.
Instances to Prove That VACCINE Sc cures
Only Limited Immunity From Smallpox.
French Sentiment In Favor of Compulsory
Vaccination Increasing.
NJ Schrevens of Tourney, in recent
report to the Academic de Medicine de
Belgique, insists on the government max
ing up its mind to bring before the legis-
lature law on obligatory vaccination.
He shows that in spite Of the creation by
the state of an institute of vaccination
the death rate of smallpox, after having
decreased for a certain time, rose again
in 1892 through carelessness and impru-
dence Children not vaccinated contin-
ued to be received in the schools, he says;
the rag trade is not watched in any way;
the isolation of contagious diseases in the
hospitals is not enforced; while work
men, boatmen, travelling showmen and
country letter carriers scatter the germs
of the disease right and left after being
ill by resuming their occupations prema-
turely.
1t is in vain, adds NJ. Schrevens, that
the Belgium government POUNDS its
hopes on the regulations which the pro-
vincial councils are celebrating concern
ing the general organization of vaccina-
ton. The law is the only radical and GER
tain measure in such questions.
have taken a good deal of trouble to
defend the idea advanced by this writer,
and in a paper addressed to the Academic
de Medicine de Paris l showed that a
law making vaccination obligatory is
impatiently awaited in France also, and
would have very direct relation to the
national defense.
While it is to be hoped that in case Of
another war we should not again see as
in 1870 25, 900 of our own people succumb
to smallpox, as against 500 on the German
side, still there Is in the scheme for
mobilization an important category Of
soldiers placed in the auxiliary services
who, having never served before, may
not have been vaccinated, and run in
this way the risk of becoming danger
of contagion.
The more one thinks on this question
the less comprehensive becomes the hes
itancy shown to give the strength of n
law to an obligation demanded by public
opinion. known quite well that there
are more or less earnest adversaries of
vaccination, and that various antiyacci-
nation leagues serve as q rallying point
to those who loudly claim the title of de-
tenders of our liberties. But liberty is
term that must always be taken in rel
alive manner, and the liberty to do one
thing implies that something else is for
hidden and imposes on society the duty
of preventing one of its members from
becoming danger to the rest. What
ever may be said or done, it is inadmis-
sible that any one should have the free
dom to damage neighbor.
The efficacy of vaccination can no
longer be doubted. Its value has been
tested and consecrated by time and ex-
perience, and it should be known every
where that it is by inoculating vaccina
that we protect ourselves from smallpox
and are rendered refractory to its action.
/ am quite aware that the following
objection is often made, and that it is
said that it is not true that vaccination
prevents smallpox, and that cases are
cited in which person properly vacci-
mated has taken smallpox. In spite Of
this | maintain my affirmation and shall
explain clearly, hope, how vaccinated
person may take smallpox and even how
smallpox and yaccina can be seen going
through their evolution together on the
same person.
Take child who has never been vac
cinated and inoculate him in six places
three on each arm. These will be fol-
lowed by the appearance of six fine pus-
tules, and it is quite possible that if a
seventh and eighth incubation had been
made they would have been followed by
seventh or eighth pustule.
What does this prove? That satura'
tion has possibly not been reached and
that a certain amount of receptivity tC
the virus still remains. The immunity
may be complete, but it may also be only
partial. If man vaccinated six, seven
eight or ten years ago be inoculated with
the same vaccine matter used for the
child and with the same care in SIX
places, instead of six pustules, as i'll the
former case, only one, two or three may
form. Saturation is manifest in this in
stance. and his immunity is complete.
With another patient revaccinated sue
cessfully three months, six months or @
year ago, and with whom the number OF
pustules was less than the number of in
EQUATIONS made, however much care
may take in inoculating him again,
shall fail altogether. In this case satu
ration is complete and immunity against
smallpox absolute.
Observation has proved the legitimacy
of the comparison between the virus OF
vaccina and the virus of smallpox, which,
acting as two reagents of the same fam.
lily, may replace or complete each other.
If / represent by 10 the maximum re-
ceptive power of person for smallpox,
am able by inoculating vaccina to COM
pletely annihilate itspower by comforting
an immunity of 10, or can do so incom-
pletely by an immunity of nine, eight,
seven, etc, by making an insufficient
number of NEGOTIATIONS.
1t is easy to understand that a recep-
tive power of 10 defended by an immuni.
yof seven, for instance, leaves recep
tive power of three for smallpox. This
is how smallpox may break out on vac
cinated person, and this is also why small
box and vaccina may go through theil
evolution together, but in such cases the
smallpox will be always light and mild.
The question of quantity must there
fore be taken into account in comforting
immunity against smallpox, especially al
in
ularly progressive manner.
The conclusion is that vaccina is the
preservativc against smallpox, but since
the immunity conferred may only be
partial and decrease with time it is wei
to be revaccinated periodically every SIX
or eight years, and again, as matter Of
precaution, whenever there is an ont
break of smallpox Herald.