The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1901-04-11
TO PREVENT
SMALL POX
A Reply to Anti
Vaccination
Letter.
STATISTICS FROM
GREAT BRITAIN
A Correspondent Comes to the
Defence of Jenner Method
Of Prevention.

/ Editor Advertise: As you have given
some prominence TO the article shall We
vaccinateE" in issue OF April 9, VIII you
allow M Z little space TO reply to it?
/ viii also discuss it By Sections, but
viii take the greatest error first: .. =.
+. Vaccination was compulsory in Eng
land until Isss. when. after q commits
sion Of inquiry. which lasted seven years,
and az which some OF the foremost SCI
entiac and medical men testified that
vaccination neither mitigated nor pre-
vented smallpox, and that vaccination
helped spread disease, the Law relating TO
the general population was repealed
There IS = great deal here that Is
wrong. In the first place. the whole
commission OF thirteen, except four,
were unanimous in their report. CTEo
wanted second compulsory vaccination
AZ 10 years Of age and two were against
compulsory vaccination.)
/ The marked decline Of smallpox NOR
rality in the first quarter OF the pres
ent century g. &, after the discovery
and Introduction Of vaccination) affords
substantial evidence in favor Of the pro-
/ tectiye influence Of vaccination tsec- so.
and il Is scarcely possible 10 deny that,
speaking generally OF the British Isles.
! q more yaccinsted population has exhib-
tied diminished mortality from small
pox (ssc. 1Al."
Now in regard to the two gentlemen
who sent in & minority report disagree
/ ing with that Of the commissioner, one
was practically pledged TO anti-yaccina-
ton as an Mp. for Leicester and the
other il is reported, was the son OF an
ardent anti-vaccinator. Further, their
minority report as q whole consisted Of
sixty-dye pages and contained very short
references to the smallpox outbreak in
Leicester Though the evidence lasted
forty-two days., while the special report
Of DR.. COPELAND in favor OF vaccination
/ from evidence produced by the outbreak
al LEICESTER alone consisted OF siIty-six
pages.
| And what was that evidence? Leiees-
ter and Gloucester, two noted ar1ti-yac-
cination towns lin the vicinity OF S-ef-
! field and warrington had, with the TWO
latter, a visit OF smallpox Sheffield and
Warrington had perhaps q hundred cases
/ in the whole epidemic, while in Leicester
and Gloucester the number Of cases
amounted 10 over 30 per week Further,
after the Government took a hand II the
matter and sent up from London some
/ hundred OF DOCTORS anu SI01tNlS 10 vac
climate the population, the epidemic that
/ had been increasing up TO that period
I died out in three weeks. And 10! why
Were the most rabid Observation-Disclosures
/ the first 20 get their children vaccinated
when the epidemic becaming alarming?
Surely, II their arguments were worth
anything, they ought 10 have the cour-
age Of their convictions.
Exactly the same thing" THAT since
( the discovery Of Jenner smallpox has
not been the terrible scourge 70 humani-
u, etc.) might be said OF other zyIno-
tie diseases
Exactly the same thing can not be
said. Sections 153 and ia Of the Report
( Of the Vaccine Commission reads: And
IL can not be asserted. when all the cir
cumstances are considered. that sanitary
improvements afford an adequate expIa-
nation Of the diminished mortality. Es-
pecially remembering that sanitation has
little or no effect in measles. scarlet few
yer, whooping cough and indeed any
disease spread by contagion or infection
and from which recovery was possible
II there are thousands Of scientific men
who do not believe that vaccination pre-
vents smallpox, there must be millions
VINO do. And those who do not have
never taken the trouble TO look at sta
tistics.
Can they explain why it is that chill
so frequently as formeEiy2 And what
does it mean2 That all children under
that age have recently been yaccinated
and are immune.
Compare the mortalities Gin different
periods of young children (who repre-
sent vaccinatfon) and of older people,
say, IS and upwards (who represent anti
vaccination, having grown out of immu-
nity).
In the years 1sts to 1854 In England and
Wales the mortality in children under
years was 1,514 per million: in those over
45 IL was twenty-four per million.
From 1855 to 1854 the mortality in chill
dren was 7ss-s per million; in old people
35.2 per million.
In the period from 1855 to 1894 (nearly
ten years. the mortality in children was
reduced to 50.2 per million and in grown
people to nineteen per million. The re-
port of the Vaccine Commission further
states that vaccination has a very po-
tent influence for nine or ten years (sec- |
ton 1s2). Consequently l think 1 have
a strong argument for your correspond /
ent herself says: IF it could be proven
that to vaccination is due the fact that /
the percentage of deaths is much lower /
1t would indeed be a strong argument" /
In regard to Italy, there must be some |
other factor at work; otherwise the vac /
cination commission would not have in !
- 80 Ia fAASiA iSpOi SECuOnS and so. /
Ihe above facts are true not only as re- I
CARDS the British Isles but also as re-
CARDS foreign countries as well |
Soldiers not protected, because yaccf |
nation did not take were less attacked by |
smallpox than those duly protected
+. and the death rate in those vacciuat- |
ed with good results was greater than |
among those in whom vaccination did /
not take"
Now, claim this is no argument at |
all, or II it is one 1t Is In favor of vac |
cfnation. / claim that there is only one |
genuine cause for non-successful vacci-
nation, and that is immunity derived |
from either a. previous vaccination. a /
previous attack OF smallpox, or by the /
mother having had smallpox within the /
nine months Immediately preceding the /
birth of the person.
l was a public vaccfnator for three |
years in England and during that time /
vaecinated over a thousand children
II vaccination failed when there was no !