The Bridgeport times and evening farmer., 1922-02-07
The Truth About Taccinia. Told by the Publicity Committee of the Bridge port Medical Association with Certain Un- solicited Additions, Which Are Taken from Other Sources

The article on Vaccinia, prepared by the Publicity Committee. of the Bridgeport Medical Ass ssociation, con- sists of two parts, somewhat inter mixed. Part one asserts that vacc1- nation protects against small pox, either making the course of the dis ease milder. or preventing it entirely This is denied by those who are op- | posed to compulsory vaccination, and since no proof is offered, save the mere assertion that it is so, no proof to the contrary will be here adduced.
 The article on Vaccinfa is unob- jectionable as far as it goes. The origin of most, if not all strains of vaccine is shrouded in twilight, though some of them are doubtless of small pox origin, because vaccination with them has been followed by an attack Of small pox in certain cases With two or three exceptions, the l statement about the consequences which follow vaccination are fair. stitutionai disease with chills. rapid pulse, depression, vomiting, dizziness and tfna1 eccentricity, with tenn perature, sometimes reaching 105 i; proof that the disease is a serious af- fair.
 There are three other vaccinal dangers of a major sort which the Publicity Committee do not tell;
 l. ton from a careless operation. 2. The danger that the vaccine Vi rus will contain unforeseen contam- nations. such as tetanus, or foot and mouth disease.
 3. The danger that the operation may fire up latent disease, or over bear the resistance of the patient.
 The risks of eXtraneous exposure are such as inhere when any path is opened into the blood stream, by which infection may enter
 The constitution of vaccine is un- known. It frequently conveys many unexpected evils, such as tetanus, foot and mouth disease, or meningi- tis.
 In a limited space not much evil dence can. be produced. The Pub hcity Committee is recommended to read the report of Dr. James S. Howe, made to the American Der theological Association in Boston, Sept. 1902, and afterward printed in the Journal of Cutaneous Diseases for January and June. 1903. There were 10 of these cases, a few of myria6s that have been reported. Dr. Howe said:
 "On the other hand it might seem more proper to call them, perhaps, cases of pemphigus and he named the symptoms of the nlalady, as it appeared in his patients, quoting Dr. Duhring.
 Dr. Duhring then said: 'I think
 
 ing the title he has and connecting it with vaccination, because it is to that point we wish to call attention,
 namely that instances of bullous denmatitis, often severe and even running a fatal course, do at times follow vaccination That it is closely allied to what is known as senli-rrlalignant or malignant penn phigus, I think probable, but wheth- CT we call it bullous dermatitis from va vaccination, or pemphigus from vac- cination, or malignant pempIigus, matters very little at the present period.''
 So much for the unmentioned risk of unexpected contamination of the vaccine.
 The effect of vaccination in excit- ing other disease, is a consequence so natural as to demand anticipation.
 Osler. in his "Principles and Prac- tice of Medicine. eighth edition, 191S," page 330. declares: "A quie- scent ma1ady may be lighted into ac- tivity by vaccination.'' This has happened with congenita1 syphilis, occasionally with tuberculosis.
 Thousands of recent vaccinations were accomplished without due care in performing the operation, or due regard to the state of health of the person about to be inoculated.