"The Leicester Method" by
J.T. Biggs
J.T. Biggs Smallpox quotes
Sanitation
[Sanitation instead of vaccination. This remarkable town proved conclusively the fallacy and dangers of vaccination. Extracts from the book : LEICESTER: SANITATION versus VACCINATION BY J.T. BIGGS J.P.]
The author of
Sanitation vs Vaccination:
The
method:
No fearmongering to get people to vaccinate and little fear of the disease
Most smallpox
mortality was in years with most vaccination
Commission, like all government vaccine committees, biased towards vaccination:
Vaccine deaths & disease:
Medical men hiding vaccine
deaths:
Medical men statistics
of case mortality rate
Medical men
refuse to allow inspection of registers
Medical men make £24,000 in fees
(that would be over £2 million in today's money)
The reality of giving vaccination: dirty, well used lancets, unsterilised septic
lymph
28% of working men, in one instance, came down sick after vaccination--how do
you imagine babies would react?:
Decline in vaccination caused a decline in all zymotic (infectious) diseases:
Pock-marked
faces:
Case mortality
Vaccinated 1902-4 London's case mortality 3 times unvaccinated Leicester, and 9
times higher in 1904
1892-1894 epidemic--1,356 lives saved compared with vaccinated times
Increase in deaths due to
diarrhoea
600 infant lives, 2,200 under 5, saved every year in Leicester due sanitation &
discarding of vaccination
Vaccinated
Sheffield
Smallpox appearance in well vaccinated Sheffield baffles medical officer!
Little cost and fear in Leicester compared to well vaccinated Sheffield
The
"wonderful" properties of glycerine--destroys all germs!
Phasing out of arm to arm vaccination led to reduction in syphilis by 50%
Few, if
any, instances of smallpox in unvaccinated children
Typical medical men, through government, imposing vaccination on people who
don't want it
The
conditions for smallpox
Medical men
fearmongering for not vaccinating
Medical man
belief in vaccination hard to shake off
Interesting account of the severity of smallpox--what makes it mild or severe?
1892-1894 outbreak began with vaccinated cases and death rate higher in
vaccinated
Medical men (1885) using alcohol as a remedy, causing 17% mortality instead of
11 or 8% without it's use
Medical man contradicts himself in his report, and lies when he says matron
doesn't mix with patients
Medical prophecy!
Medical lies as to
smallpox cases unvaccinated
Children unfit for vaccination, who die,
unfairly included in the
death-rate of the unvaccinated
193 children died when 84% vaccinated, nearly all vaccinated. When
vaccination 12.9% only 14 children died
"The town of Leicester is, and has been for the last twenty years, the least vaccinated town in the kingdom. Its average population from 1873 to 1894 was about two-thirds that of the Army during the same period. Yet the small-pox deaths in the Army and Navy were thirty-seven per million, those of Leicester under fifteen per million."--- [1912 Book] LEICESTER: SANITATION versus VACCINATION BY J.T. BIGGS J.P.
These (tables 22 & 23) magnificent and incomparable results, must be considered in the light of Leicester's unfavourable geology and geographical position and the circumstances of its population. The town is in a valley, with a sluggish river, a clayey, impervious, and water-logged subsoil; while its population is, for the most part, of the artisan class—working in factories and warehouses. And, what is still more inimical to health, and especially to the younger lives, a very large proportion of the married women work in warehouses and factories. What all this means must be borne in mind. The position Leicester has achieved is, indeed, a proud one, and to have raised itself by sanitation from being the unhealthiest of the large manufacturing towns, to the enviable altitude of being the most healthy, undoubtedly constitutes a marvellous record. Think of the vast array of lives that might have been saved, not only in the United Kingdom, but throughout the world, if instead of stamping vaccine virus into healthy human bodies, Sanitary Authorities had earlier placed their trust in Municipal Cleanliness alone! CH 56
The Leicester
Anti-Vaccination League was formed in 1869. The stalwart little band of
pioneers, numbering less than twenty persons, laboured on, until they grew
numerically to such an extent that, whereas in 1867 over 94 per cent. of the
children born were vaccinated, in 1897 only 1.3 per cent, of the infants were
subjected to the trying ordeal. And that low percentage of vaccinations in the
last-mentioned year was arrived at in spite of—and perhaps, to some extent, as
the natural outcome of—many thousands of prosecutions against defaulters. These
were instituted under the oppressive Act of 1867, and resulted in the infliction
of fines, the levying of distress warrants, and the commitment of parents to
prison. Obviously, those figures demonstrate that the people of Leicester were
following the lead of the Anti-Vaccination League, and that not one class only,
but all sections of the townspeople, were equally resolute in their opposition
and detestation of the hateful legal enactments.
The experience of the terrible smallpox epidemic of 1871-73,
when many thousands of vaccinated persons contracted the disease, and several
hundreds died as the result of the alleged "protection" (!) having lamentably
failed in its hour of trial, produced in the minds of the thinking people of
Leicester pronounced hostility against the blood-polluting quackery, which was
found to be more baneful in its ultimate results than the disease it was
supposed to prevent.
LEICESTER: SANITATION versus VACCINATION
BY J.T. BIGGS J.P.
Pro-vaccinists regarded it as a thing impossible and incredible that unvaccinated Leicester could, for even one year, much less for so long a period of years, successfully resist repeated and numerous attacks of small-pox. But such is now a stubborn, unimpeachable, and accomplished fact. Indeed, no other manufacturing town can show a better or cleaner record with respect to small-pox, and I question whether there is another large town, manufacturing or otherwise, at all comparable with Leicester, in the whole of the United Kingdom, which, with all the advantages that are claimed for vaccination, can equal, or even approach, the conspicuous success which stands to the credit of Leicester in this category LEICESTER: SANITATION versus VACCINATION BY J.T. BIGGS J.P.
"IT
is true that since 1872 there have been outbreaks of small-pox in Leicester,
but, in each instance, the disease has not only been imported from well
"protected" localities, but, as usually happens, these outbreaks started with
well vaccinated or revaccinated cases. Two of those invasions—viz., in 1892-94
and 1902-04—resulted in what were termed "epidemics." Notwithstanding the fact
that well vaccinated communities were also attacked, and suffered to a far worse
degree than Leicester, the strong and definite attitude it has taken against
vaccination made the town once more the target of innumerable venomous shafts
from the pro-vaccinists.
They appeared to have overlooked
the fact that in 1871-73, with nominally all the inhabitants vaccinated, 360
small-pox deaths occurred in a population of about 98,000, being a death-rate of
3,673 per million living. Whereas, in " unprotected " Leicester, in 1892-94,
there were only 21 small-pox deaths in a population of about 182,000, being only
115 per million living ; and in 1902-04 there were only 30 small-pox deaths in a
population of about 220,000, or only 136 per million living."----LEICESTER: SANITATION versus VACCINATION
BY J.T. BIGGS J.P.
Not only has the general death-rate declined from 27 per 1,000 in 1872, with vaccination in full force, to only about 17 per 1,000 for the past ten years, with but 1 or 2 per cent, of vaccination; but what is more striking, the death-rate of young children has declined enormously since compulsory vaccination ceased. Still more significant, there has been very little small-pox in Leicester since vaccination has been abandoned, and the deaths from zymotic diseases have shown a remarkable decrease. Whatever small-pox has occurred in Leicester for many years past has usually been imported, and always by vaccinated persons from well-vaccinated districts. CH 64
The author
of Sanitation vs Vaccination:
BIGGS, JOHN THOMAS (Sanitary
Engineer).— Member of the Town Council, Alderman, Magistrate, and Member of the
Derwent Valley Water Board. For many years a Member of the Leicester and
Barrow-on-Soar Boards of Guardians. Was selected as one of the deputation to
present the Leicester Town Council resolutions to the Commission. Also appointed
by the Leicester Board of Guardians as one of the deputation to present their
Memorial and Statistical Tables. Opposed compulsion from the outset of looking
into the subject on the broad ground of its infringement upon, and invasion of,
personal liberty. During the small-pox epidemic of 1871-73 closely studied the
outbreak, and the causes which led up to the prolongation and severity of the
visitation, and became convinced of the inefficacy of vaccination to prevent the
disease or mitigate its type. One of his brothers also suffered through
vaccination. He withstood several prosecutions, and had three distress warrants
issued, and his household goods were sold by the instructions of the Board of
Guardians of which he was a member. Answered over 3,000 questions. For
twenty-three years Mr. Biggs was a Member of the Leicester Sanitary Committee.
LEICESTER: SANITATION versus VACCINATION
BY J.T. BIGGS J.P.
The method:
A new method for which great practical
utility is claimed has been enforced by the sanitary committee of the
Corporation for the stamping out of small-pox, and the chairman of the Committee
has gone so far as to declare that small-pox is one of the least troublesome
diseases with which they have to deal. The method of treatment, in a word, is
this:—As soon as small-pox breaks out, the medical man and the householder are
compelled under penalty to at once report the outbreak to the Corporation. The
small-pox van is at once ordered by telephone to proceed to the house in
question the hospital authorities are also instructed by telephone to make all
arrangements, and thus, within a few hours, the sufferer is safely in the
hospital. The family and inmates of the house are placed in quarantine in
comfortable quarters, and the house thoroughly disinfected. The result is that
in every instance the disease has been promptly and completely stamped out at a
paltry expense. Under such a system the Corporation have expressed their opinion
that vaccination is unnecessary, as they claim to deal with the disease in a
more direct and much more efficacious manner. This, and a widespread belief that
death and disease have resulted from the operation of vaccination, may be said
to be the foundation upon which the existing opposition the Acts rests."
LEICESTER: SANITATION versus VACCINATION
BY J.T. BIGGS J.P.
A large and increasing portion of the public were of opinion that the best way to get rid of smallpox and similar diseases was to use plenty of water, eat good food, live in light and airy houses, and see that the Corporation kept the streets clean and the drains in order. If such details were attended to, there was no need to fear small pox, or any of its kindred ; and if they were neglected, neither vaccination nor any other prescription by Act of Parliament could save them. (Cheers.) LEICESTER: SANITATION versus VACCINATION BY J.T. BIGGS J.P.
Leicester has furnished, both by precept and example, irrefutable proof of the capability and influence of Sanitation, not only in combating and controlling, but also in practically banishing infectious diseases from its midst. This affirmation is subject to certain qualifications. The effects of narrow, ill-conditioned streets; of imperfect drainage and improper dwellings; of circumstances of environment; and of inherited physical disability must, and will for a time, continue. These adverse elements are being gradually eliminated. Apart from those drawbacks, a town newly planned on the most up-to-date principles of space and air, and adopting the "Leicester Method" of Sanitation, could bid defiance not to smallpox only, but to other infectious, if not to nearly all zymotic, diseases. Even for small-pox, not even the merest tyro among Jennerian votaries would now venture to claim, that vaccination could achieve all that sanitation has accomplished. This is self-evident, because even pro-vaccinists, of the most pronounced type, now supplement the Jennerian operation with the "Leicester Method" of dealing with the disease. They dare not, as aforetime, trust solely to vaccination. To do so would, on their part, be culpable, if not in the highest degree criminal, neglect. LEICESTER: SANITATION versus VACCINATION BY J.T. BIGGS J.P.
No fearmongering to get people to vaccinate and little fear of the disease
There is still another aspect
which also redounds to the good sense of the people of Leicester. Whenever an
outbreak of small-pox occurs, there is an entire absence of "panic" (excepting in the "protected"
circles) such as usually occurs in efficiently vaccinated towns. No flaming
posters are placed upon the walls to create alarm and excitement. The Sanitary
authorities go about their work in a quiet, unostentatious (but, withal,
thorough) manner, and this inspires confidence in the minds of the people, and
at the same time allays their fears. Whatever stir or attempted scare occurs is
outside the Borough, usually in medical publications, whose business, for many
years, has been to fruitlessly endeavour to detract from the splendid results in
dealing with small-pox which have been achieved by Leicester.
LEICESTER: SANITATION versus VACCINATION
BY J.T. BIGGS J.P.
Most
smallpox mortality was in years with most vaccination:
Small-pox inoculation, in its day, was as rife in
Leicester as anywhere. The practice of vaccination followed, but there are no
reliable official records obtainable as to the precise amount of vaccination
earlier than 1849. At that date, the registers show that over 74 per cent, of
the children born were vaccinated, consequently there must have been a
considerable volume of vaccination before that time. This increased to nearly 93
per cent, in 1854, and, although varying in amount, kept at a fairly high level,
reaching an unusual figure in 1863, and its maximum in 1872, both being times of
exceptionally severe smallpox epidemics, especially that of 1872.
It is futile, therefore, for
anyone to allege that, in the great pandemic years of 1871-73, Leicester was an
unvaccinated—or, to use the modern medical term, an "unprotected"—community.
Whatever " protection " vaccination could afford as a preventive of small-pox,
Leicester undoubtedly enjoyed at that time. But in those dreadful and fateful
years, several thousands of our "protected" (?) people were mercilessly
attacked by small-pox, until the fruitless attempt to count the numbers was
abandoned in despair, and the required information entirely lost. The fearful
death roll of 360 victims formed the only basis upon which any sort of
calculation could be made as to the approximate number of small-pox cases which
then occurred in the town. Need anyone wonder that the
belief in the prophylactic virtues of vaccination rapidly dwindled?
Particularly so, because with the decline of vaccination came a diminution not
only of small-pox, but also of all kindred zymotic diseases
(1) There was an enormous
rise in small-pox mortality after more than a quarter of a century of continuous
vaccination prior to 1872, at which date occurred the greatest and most fatal
smallpox epidemic ever known or recorded in Leicester for over half a century.
(2) That from 1872 a rapid
decline of vaccintion took place, and that such decline is coincident with the
lowest small-pox mortality known until that time.
(3) That with the
practical abandonment of vaccination, and the introduction and perfecting of
the " Leicester Method " of Notification, Sanitation, Isolation, Quarantine,
Disinfection, Observation, etc., small-pox mortality has become, to all intents
and purposes, extinct.
LEICESTER: SANITATION versus VACCINATION
BY J.T. BIGGS J.P.
It must be borne in mind that
the epidemic of 1871-73 found a fully
vaccinated population in Leicester, both infantile and adult, whilst those of
1892-94 and 1902-04 occurred in populations essentially unvaccinated. A yet more
striking feature is that in 1892-94 there were, approximately, 50,000
unvaccinated children in the town ; and in 1902-04 there would not be fewer than
70,000 unvaccinated children in Leicester, nearly all of whom passed through
these epidemics entirely unscathed. Only very few children, indeed, were
attacked.
Who, then, can blame
Leicester people for giving up the nostrum of vaccination? With such an
object-lesson before their very eyes, it would indeed have been strange had they
done otherwise! Yet the medical journals have continued to denounce Leicester
for taking up an attitude against vaccination, which not only entirely accords
with reason and common sense, but is justified to the full by its own
unimpeachable experience.
LEICESTER: SANITATION versus VACCINATION
BY J.T. BIGGS J.P.
Now, comparing the small-pox epidemic of 1868-72 in Leicester, when the "protection" was 18 per cent, on the professional five years basis, with the epidemics of 1892-94 and 1902-04, when the "protection" was less than one per cent., what do we find? That, reckoning the difference in population, in the first of those epidemics, with eighteen times the amount of vaccinal "protection," Leicester had nearly thirty times as much fatal small-pox as in the second and third epidemics. So much for the highly vaunted "protection" theory, worked out on a scientific period basis! LEICESTER: SANITATION versus VACCINATION BY J.T. BIGGS J.P.
Commission, like all government vaccine committees, biased towards vaccination:
It has, of course, been
commonly assumed that the Commission appointed by Queen Victoria was impartially
constituted. But of its original fifteen members not one was recognised as an
avowed anti-vaccinist, and only four of the members were surmised to be opposed
to compulsion. Had strict impartiality been the intention of the Government,
seven of the strongest representatives on each side would have been selected,
under the presidency of a disinterested chairman.. For a considerable time, in
consequence of its strongly biased composition, the anti-vaccinists hesitated
as to whether they should, or should not, actually altogether ignore the
Commission.LEICESTER: SANITATION versus VACCINATION
BY J.T. BIGGS J.P.
Vaccine deaths & disease:
I PRESENTED a table (pages
417-433, Fourth Report, Royal Commission) of 109 deaths, 186 cases of injury
(many of them permanent), and two of small-pox, following on vaccination, being
a total of 297 cases in Leicester and neighbourhood, with the names, addresses,
and details, each case being vouched for by the parents themselves. It is a
harrowing, heart-rending catalogue. This gruesome testimony caused considerable
questioning by the Commissioners, who, however, hesitated to accept such
personal statements, unless supported by expert medical opinion! The evidence of
careful, loving mothers, who had unintermittently tended their suffering little
ones, was, it seems, not deemed trustworthy without being thus peculiarly
confirmed! Was it likely that medical men would convict either themselves or
their brethren? Manifestly, those parents (who had "accepted" vaccination) must
have been in its favour, rather than against it. Otherwise their children would
certainly not have been vaccinated.
The most striking points in
Table 1 are:—
(1) That
the highest death-rates from erysipelas, both under one year, under five years,
and at all ages, are concurrent with the highest years of vaccination ; and
(2)
That each death-rate practically touches its lowest point coincidentally with
the lowest percentage of vaccination.
By no stretch of the
imagination, nor by any subterfuge, can these facts be made to tell in favour of
vaccination. On the other hand, there is abundant and undeniable evidence that
the practice operated most fatally.
Another feature of this table
is that a rise in the death-rate from erysipelas, shown in 1898-1905, for
infants under one year, is concurrent with an increase of vaccination in the
same periods, caused principally by the more rigid pressure of the law, just
before, during, and after the passing of the Vaccination Act of 1898. In this
year—under an Order of the Local Government
Medical men hiding vaccine deaths:
NEALE, JOHN HEADLEY, M.B.,
M.R.C.P. (one of the Physicians to the Leicester Infirmary).— Called by the
Commissioners respecting the statement by Mrs. Hart that he said her child was
suffering from blood poisoning when taken for treatment to the Infirmary. This
he denied, and said the child was dying of Bright's disease. Had only seen one
case of blood poisoning from vaccination. Answered 97 questions. LEICESTER: SANITATION versus VACCINATION
BY J.T. BIGGS J.P.
In passing, it is significant to note that this official inquiry elicited the fact that these six little victims of vaccination had all been buried under misleading death certificates, no word as to vaccination appearing on any of those documents. That practice of "preserving vaccination from reproach " is believed to be common, and if the suspicion be well founded, it shows how our national vital statistics are considerably vitiated and the public deceived. LEICESTER: SANITATION versus VACCINATION BY J.T. BIGGS J.P.
It may be here observed that, in this Norwich Disaster, there were four deaths, three of which were misleadingly certified, no mention of vaccination appearing on any of those death certificates. These, so to speak, accidental revelations as to falsely certifying, occurring as they do in different parts of the country, are eloquent in their suggestiveness as to the widespread prevalence of the discreditable "hushing-up" business. LEICESTER: SANITATION versus VACCINATION BY J.T. BIGGS J.P.
Still another inquiry was held, at Leicester, in 1888, respecting the death of a child at New Humberstone from "diffuse cellulitis" (a euphemism for vaccinal poisoning of the cellular tissues). Dr. Barry, who held this inquiry, described the term as a "euphemism," but carefully avoided blaming vaccination. He censured the Public Vaccinator, the Rural Sanitary Authority, some inoffensive poultry, piggeries, etc. He severely blamed the parents, but considerately (!) abstained in his report from censuring either the bereaved parents or their deceased child. The erysipelas, he said, was "traumatic." (See page 494, Fourth Report, Royal Commission.) LEICESTER: SANITATION versus VACCINATION BY J.T. BIGGS J.P.
FINALLY, there is that ghastly catalogue of vaccinal deaths, compiled from the Registrar-General's own return. Such has been the damning evidence of this official record that, in 1902, the Registrar-General discontinued his former nomenclature. Although the phrase, "effects of vaccination," appears in his annual reports, the heading in the weekly returns is deaths from "Cow-Pox" only. The limiting tendency of this alteration is thus apparently effecting a considerable, but illusory, reduction in this "cloud of witnesses" against vaccination Even this distinction has since disappeared from the weekly returns. In a footnote, it is stated that—"Commencing with 1911 considerable modifications were made in the form of this return." Explanations of these modifications are given, but no mention is made of the transfer to another classification of the deaths from "Cow-Pox or Other Effects of Vaccination." These deaths from cow-pox and other effects of vaccination may, or may not, be included under the heading, "Other Epidemic Diseases." Apparently they are now to be buried beyond recognition, to save vaccination with "glycerinated calf lymp " from reproach. LEICESTER: SANITATION versus VACCINATION BY J.T. BIGGS J.P.
Medical
men statistics of case mortality rate
Even assuming their figures
are correct, it is for our opponents to tell us how it happens that the
unvaccinated case fatality-rate in well-vaccinated London is over 48 per cent.,
while at unvaccinated Leicester, according to the reports of the Medical Officer
of Health for 1902-04, the fatality-rate of the unvaccinated is only 4.87— a
difference of 43.52 per cent, in favour of Leicester. Perhaps they will kindly
explain how this difference arises ! LEICESTER: SANITATION versus VACCINATION
BY J.T. BIGGS J.P.
Medical men
refuse to allow inspection of registers
Owing to the difficulty I experienced in endeavouring to ascertain the
vaccinal condition of the patients in hospital, during my investigation of the
small-pox epidemic at Middlesbrough, 1897-98, I suggested to Mr. Alex. M'Arthur,
M.P. for Leicester, the desirability of obtaining legal authority for inspecting
the registers of cases treated in small-pox hospitals. Mr. M'Arthur thereupon
secured the insertion of Section 8 in the Vaccination Act of 1898, which grants
facilities for such inspection to be carried out.
When application was made, under this Section, during the
London epidemic of 1901-02, by the National Anti-Vaccination League, to the
Metropolitan Asylums Board, they
set the Act at defiance, and refused permission to examine their registers. The
question was raised in Parliament, but, in the end, they shuffled out of their
legal obligation on the plea that the Metropolitan Asylums Board is not a "sanitary authority" (as specified by the Act)—a mere quibble of words.
So the Metropolitan Asylums
Board not only issued premature and inaccurate small-pox statistics—which appear
to the uninitiated to favour vaccination—but, by refusing to allow inspection of
their registers, they actually became law-breakers, and thus defeated the object
Parliament had in view. The less, therefore, they profess that it is no part of
their function either "to promote or to oppose vaccination," the better for
their reputation—should they desire to pose as disinterested and fair. If the
vaccinal condition of the patients (as entered in the official registers) is a
truthful record, the Metropolitan Asylums Board ought rather to court inquiry
than to burke it, no matter whether an Act of Parliament has been passed for
their guidance or not. Secrecy can only excite suspicion. CH 51. LEICESTER: SANITATION versus VACCINATION
BY J.T. BIGGS J.P.
Medical men make
£24,000 in fees
When the small-pox epidemic
began in 1900, an enormous number of persons were revaccinated. The expenditure
under this head alone from 1st June, 1900, to 1st March, 1902, was no less a sum
than £32,236 ! ! Of this astounding amount, nearly £24,000 went into the pockets
of medical practitioners as fees, apart from the cost of lymph, which was
£4,570. Yet medical men are offended at any suggestion of pecuniary interest in
vaccination! From April, 1900, to May, 1902, the huge total of 413,237
revaccinations were performed, almost sufficient, one would imagine, to have
"protected" the whole of the United Kingdom. CH 52 LEICESTER: SANITATION versus VACCINATION
BY J.T. BIGGS J.P.
The reality of giving vaccination: dirty, well used lancets, unsterilised septic
lymph:
A similar Local Government
Board Inquiry was held, in 1882, at Derby, by Dr. P. W. Barry, owing to the
death of a child following vaccination. In this instance the Public Vaccinator
did not even hold a certificate of "proficiency in vaccination "! It was found
that he had used a lancet "without a point, rusty and dirty ; the vesicle opener
also rusty and dirty." One of the tubes was coated inside with "albuminous
matter" ; others contained " opaque lymph," and one "a little blood." Some tubes
were not even sealed, but contained "opaque lymph, slightly bloody." It was
reported that the "septic infection" was inoculated into the child "from some
dirty appliance" used by this model (!) Public Vaccinator. He was further
censured for "erroneous entries in the Register." (See page 484, Fourth Report,
Royal Commission.) LEICESTER: SANITATION versus VACCINATION
BY J.T. BIGGS J.P.
28% of working men, in one instance, came down sick after vaccination--how do
you imagine babies would react?:
Of 587 men vaccinated, no
fewer than 166, or more than 28 per cent., actually went on the sick list as the
result of vaccination. They received sick-pay at the public expense, the
contractors also being compensated for loss of their services. To overcome the
natural reluctance of the men, a bribe of 5s. was offered to each one of them,
as an inducement to be vaccinated. "Every precaution" was taken, and all the
Local Government Board regulations were most rigidly observed. The "lymph" was
of the purest and most approved blend, and was obtained from Faulkners Vaccine
Institution, Endell Street, London, W.C., and the Association for the Supply of
Pure Vaccine Lymph, Pall Mall, London, W.
The men were of the strongest possible physical type.
Notwithstanding all those advantages, consequent, upon the operations, 35 men
were off duty with fever, an average of 5.5 days each ; 125 men were off duty
with septic inflammation, an average of 6.8 days each ; 3 men were off duty with
abscesses, an average of 34.6 days each; 3 men were off duty with general
pustular eczema., an average of 23,0 days each—giving a total of 166 strong men
on sick-pay for an average of 7.4 days each.
If such is the " benign" (?) effect of carefully prepared
glycerinated calf lymph, scientifically administered to the strongest and most
able-bodied workmen, what must be the possibilities of its effects on tender
infants, or persons of weakly constitutions?
If these facts were placed before parents, there are very few
who would venture to submit either themselves or their children to the
"propitious" influence of such "carefully prepared glycerinated calf lymph."
Moreover, who can tell what permanent impairment of health
has been inflicted upon the 166 men who suffered so severely ? Certainly not
those gentlemen who performed the operation. LEICESTER: SANITATION versus VACCINATION
BY J.T. BIGGS J.P.
Decline in vaccination caused a decline in all zymotic (infectious) diseases:
THE seven principal zymotic
diseases are Small-Pox, Measles, Scarlet Fever, Diphtheria, Whooping Cough,
Simple Fevers, and Diarrhoea. Just as there was considerably less small-pox in
Leicester when vaccination had been abandoned, so with all these other zymotic
diseases. Table 43 (see Appendix) gives, for Leicester, these diseases in
quinquennial groups over the long period of more than 70 years. No unprejudiced
mind can examine the facts here presented without recognising that, as between
the earlier groups of high vaccination years in the table, and the later groups
of years— when vaccination had become a merely nominal factor—some exciting
cause must have produced the high mortality so very noticeable in the earlier
periods. If vaccination was not that cause, it is for the advocates of
vaccination to cite another. This they will find to be a somewhat difficult, if
not an impossible, task. Also, they might suggest what accounts for the enormous
decline in the death-rate if it is not the abandonment of vaccination, coupled
with the increased activity of our Sanitary authorities.
........With vaccinations over 90 per cent, of the births, the zymotic death-rate rose to the enormous figure of
6,852 per million!
There is but little vaccination in Leicester now, no small-pox, and the
death-rate from these seven principal zymotics has fallen in 1908-10 to the
almost incredibly low figure of only 1,153 per million!!! What has achieved
this astounding revolution? Certainly not vaccination. It is the direct outcome
of active, persistent, and solid progress in sanitation, which, in its broadest
sense, covers the entire exclusion of the absolutely insanitary and
disease-diffusing practice of cow-poxing......In other words, our
improved sanitation, and rejection of
vaccination, are saving nearly 1,400 lives annually from the zymotic group of
diseases alone! LEICESTER: SANITATION versus VACCINATION
BY J.T. BIGGS J.P.
THE fact that with less vaccination the town enjoyed better health, and the coincident decline of vaccination and small-pox, had great effect on the minds of the people of Leicester. Not small-pox alone, but the infantile death-rate, the whole, of the zymotic diseases, and the general death-rate, all declined in a very marked degree, as vaccination was discarded, and as the tables and diagrams submitted to the Royal Commission and reproduced here indisputably prove. CHAPTER 69. MR. H. D. DUDGEON ON SANITATION. LEICESTER: SANITATION versus VACCINATION BY J.T. BIGGS J.P.
Pock-marked
faces:
Pock-marked faces depend,
not upon vaccinal condition, but upon the treatment of the patients, and their
occurrence after small-pox is a proof of inefficient medical knowledge and
improper nursing, or both combined. The less, therefore, said about the absence
of pock-marked faces being due to, and an argument in favour of, vaccination,
the better. The facts entirely refute the validity of such a claim. LEICESTER: SANITATION versus VACCINATION
BY J.T. BIGGS J.P.
Case mortality
So that, after casting aside as worthless over 75 per cent, of the 20,000
cases they themselves chose to enumerate, and having specifically selected a
number of cases—in which "there is no doubt some room for error"—upon which to
base their final result, we then have left 4,754 vaccinated and revaccinated
cases, or vaccination failures, with 247 deaths, yielding a case fatality-rate
of 5.2 per cent. Compare this with the case fatality-rate of vaccinated and
unvaccinated together in the Leicester epidemic of 1892-94 of 5.8 per cent., and
also with the Leicester epidemic of 1902-04, with its case fatality-rate of only
3.49 per cent., or, taking the epidemic of 1904 alone, a case fatality-rate of
only 1.24 per cent. In other words, the case fatality-rate (2.48 per
cent.) of the 1,125 cases with four vaccination marks, specially selected by the
Royal Commission, was exactly double that of unvaccinated Leicester (1.24 per
cent.) in the small-pox epidemic of 1904. Wherein, we may ask, is the benefit of
either vaccination or revaccination? How much more serviceable to humanity would
it have been, had the Royal Commission devoted half of this futile ingenuity to
the important Leicester evidence in favour of sanitation, as compared with and
opposed to vaccination!
LEICESTER: SANITATION versus VACCINATION
BY J.T. BIGGS J.P.
"In the 1903 epidemic there were 394 cases, with 21 deaths, yielding a case mortality of 5.3 per cent. In the 1904 epidemic there were 321 cases, with 4 deaths, yielding a case mortality of only 1.2 per cent. Several of our large cities suffered from more or less extensive epidemics about this period, but in none was such a low case mortality as 1.2 per cent, recorded. In view of the large 41 proportion of unvaccinated persons in Leicester, such a result is specially remarkable." (Page 27.) CH 76 LEICESTER: SANITATION versus VACCINATION BY J.T. BIGGS J.P.
Even the case fatality-rate of the vaccinated patients in the London epidemic, as given in the special report, was 14.21 per cent. Compare this with the case fatality-rate of the unvaccinated patients at Leicester, in 1902-04 (given by Dr. Millard at page 21 of his report for 1904), of only 4.87 per cent, for the whole epidemic ; also with the unvaccinated case fatality-rate for the 1904 portion of the epidemic, of only 1.6 per cent. London has not much to boast of, when its vaccinated case fatality-rate was, therefore, nearly three times as great as (or about 300 per cent, above) Leicester's unvaccinated case fatality-rate for the whole epidemic, and about nine times higher than (or nearly 900 per cent, above) Leicester's unvaccinated case fatality-rate for 1904. CH 52 LEICESTER: SANITATION versus VACCINATION BY J.T. BIGGS J.P.
Vaccinated 1902-4 London's case mortality 3 times unvaccinated Leicester, and 9
times higher in 1904
Even the case fatality-rate
of the vaccinated patients in the London epidemic, as given in the special
report, was 14.21 per cent. Compare this with the case fatality-rate of the
unvaccinated patients at Leicester, in 1902-04 (given by Dr. Millard at page 21
of his report for 1904), of only 4.87 per cent, for the whole epidemic ; also
with the unvaccinated case fatality-rate for the 1904 portion of the epidemic,
of only 1.6 per cent. London has not much to boast of, when its vaccinated case
fatality-rate was, therefore, nearly three times as great as (or about 300 per
cent, above) Leicester's unvaccinated case fatality-rate for the whole epidemic,
and about nine times higher than (or nearly 900 per cent, above) Leicester's
unvaccinated case fatality-rate for 1904. CH 52
LEICESTER: SANITATION versus VACCINATION
BY J.T. BIGGS J.P.
1892-1894
epidemic--1,356 lives saved over vaccinated times
For the ten years ended 1872......primary vaccinations (were).......84.3 per
cent, to the total births. Yet during the epidemic of 1871-73 there died of
small-pox in Leicester .... no fewer than 193 children under ten, nearly
all of whom were vaccinated. This is a small-pox death-rate of 6,699 per million
living under ten, and a small-pox death-rate of 1,964 per million on the total
population.
For the ten years ended 1893, ...primary vaccinations
... amounted
to...12.9 per cent, to the total births yet only fourteen
children under ten have died during the outbreak of 1893-94, or a small-pox
death-rate of only 301 per million living under ten,
and a death-rate of only 76 per million on the total population.........with about seven times more vaccination of children under ten, we had a
small-pox death-rate nearly twenty-four times more fatal than in the less "protected" period. Had the same small-pox death-rate prevailed amongst the
children under ten in 1892-94 as prevailed in 1871-73, there would have died not
the fourteen who actually succumbed, but no fewer than 362. ......Again, compare the low fatality of our present unvaccinating period
with the high fatality of our highest vaccination period, and we are effecting
an annual saving of 1,356 lives, nearly all those of children, which vaccination
used to boast it saved. We can well afford to concede all the saving that
vaccination claims (even the lives of the fourteen children already referred
to), while we show. CH 78
LEICESTER: SANITATION versus VACCINATION
BY J.T. BIGGS J.P.
Increase in deaths due to
diarrhoea
How far this awful fatality from diarrhoea increased our infantile mortality
may be seen from the figures in Table 13. For the eight years, 1868-75, when
vaccination was not only rigorously enforced, but kept at over 80 per cent, of
the births, the death-rate from diarrhoea reached an annual average of over
3,000 per million. Exactly twenty years later, with more, and better,
sanitation, and less vaccination, for the eight years, 1888-95, when the
vaccinations averaged only 3.1 per cent, of the births, the death-rate from
diarrhoea had fallen to an annual average of only 1,397 per million. I do not,
for one moment, contend that vaccination has been the sole cause of increased
infantile mortality; but I do most emphatically maintain that when vaccination
was enforced upon very young infants, it was one of the principal agents
contributing to "the Massacre of the Innocents." ...The enormously decreased
death-rate from diarrhoea was undoubtedly due to three principal causes—(1) The
comparatively small amount of vaccination, compared with 1868-72 and following
years; (2) the greatly improved sanitary conditions in the town; and (3) the
improved physical stamina and virility of unvaccinated parents, who are now
contributing a considerable quota of the total births.
LEICESTER: SANITATION versus VACCINATION
BY J.T. BIGGS J.P.
600 infant lives, 2,200 under 5, saved every year in Leicester due sanitation &
discarding of vaccination
That Leicester (which was formerly classed by the Registrar-General amongst
the most unhealthy towns of the country) had an average annual death-rate in
1868-72 of 26.82 per 1,000 total population, when the percentage of vaccinations
was 91.7 to the total births; and that subsequently, when vaccinations had
fallen to 2.1 per cent, to the total births, the average annual death-rate from
all causes for 1893-97 had fallen to only 17.31 per 1,000 living, and has since
gone down to 12.30.
The lesson of this table (49) is that when we pinned our
faith to the prophylactic and saving virtues of vaccination—from 1868 to 1872—no
fewer than an annual average of 239 out of every 1,000 infants born died within
twelve months of their birth. Now, having seen the error of our ways, and
discarded the nostrum, instead of 239 deaths, there is only an annual average of
128 deaths per 1,000 births, or a decrease of 111 per thousand, being a saving
of 46 per cent. These figures represent an annual saving of over 600 infant
lives each year in Leicester.
..The saving of children's lives under five years of age is
on the same lines of progress. Whereas in the high vaccination period of 1866-72
there were 107 deaths per thousand living at that age, now there are only 34 per
thousand, being a decrease of 73 per thousand, or a saving of 68 per cent. This
represents a saving of over 2,200 lives each year of children living under five.
LEICESTER: SANITATION versus VACCINATION
BY J.T. BIGGS J.P.
Vaccinated Sheffield
He also declared that the town was so well vaccinated that there was no fear
of smallpox. However, when the epidemic came, in 1887, in the dire distress and
pitiless extremity to which the Authorities were driven, it was confessed they
were beaten, and that the epidemic "must burn itself out"!!! So overtaxed, and,
indeed, overwhelmed, was the department, that the statistics for 1887 were not
even published until June, 1892!CH
54
LEICESTER: SANITATION versus VACCINATION
BY J.T. BIGGS J.P.
Smallpox appearance in well vaccinated Sheffield baffles medical officer
After referring to the population and of cases and deaths dealt with in Dr. Barry's report, Dr. Buchanan proceeds :.—"The epidemic of small-pox
at Sheffield has turned out to be one of importance, judged on the scale of
English epidemics during the last sixteen years, and it has stood
conspicuously above any other small-pox prevalence of the years 1887-88.
...For any preference shown by
small-pox for Sheffield, as the place to be invaded, I can offer no
sufficient explanation. While small-pox exists in England, or can be imported
into England from abroad, its introduction into any English community is an
affair of circumstance ; of the movements of persons and things that are able
to carry its infection. . . .So small-pox in the early
part of 1887 made its appearance at Sheffield; in two sub-districts of the
borough almost simultaneously."
These last are two delicious
paragraphs. Dr. Buchanan says he "can offer no sufficient explanation" why small-pox invaded Sheffield. Had such an outbreak occurred
at Leicester, he would, of course, have found no such difficulty. If so
disastrous "an affair of circumstance "could happen to a city efficiently "protected " from the inroads of small-pox, as Sheffield was at that time, of
what possible use is vaccination ? CH 54
LEICESTER: SANITATION versus VACCINATION
BY J.T. BIGGS J.P.
Little cost and fear in Leicester compared to well vaccinated Sheffield
What a terrible
indictment of a city which, it is admitted on all hands, had scrupulously obeyed the vaccination laws, and was
as fully vaccinated as any possible system of compulsory vaccination could
secure. Moreover, many thousands of pounds had been spent, year by year, on the
"protective" process of vaccination, and then it failed at the critical moment,
and a further £32,000 was flung away.
Contrast all this paralysis
of trade, confusion, turmoil, financial loss, and fearful disaster (the walls
placarded all over with posters calculated to help create and maintain the
scare), with the quiet, unostentatious, but prompt and effective working of the
"Leicester Method" by the officials at unvaccinated Leicester. No placarding of
the walls, no terrifying newspaper paragraphs, no excessive expenditure on
vaccination and revaccination, no addition to the normal cost of hospital
administration, and no increase of the rates. Which is best? CH 54
LEICESTER: SANITATION versus VACCINATION
BY J.T. BIGGS J.P.
The
"wonderful" properties of glycerine--destroys all germs!
In the
"Times," of 16th March, 1898, Mr. Chaplin, on introducing the Vaccination Bill,
and referring to the Final Report of the Royal Commission, is thus reported......"I may remind the House that there have been some remarkable
discoveries in recent years, and if we take
advantage of them, as I hope and believe we shall,
they will go far to revolutionise the whole of the
previous system of public vaccination. I am
referring to the results which it is proved are
obtained from the preservation of lymph taken from the calf in glycerine. .
........it appears that calf lymph preserved in this
way possesses remarkable properties and advantages. In the first place, all
extra organisms when the lymph is mixed with glycerine are destroyed. For
instance, it is found that such organisms as the microbes of tubercle,
erysipelas, and diphtheria, and other diseases (even when they have been added
for the purpose of experiment) very shortly disappear, although it retains
its full activity for vaccination purposes.
"Secondly,
it can be kept for long periods, and upon an emergency large quantities can
with facility be supplied; and, thirdly, which is a matter of the first
importance, the necessity for arm-to-arm vaccination, and consequently all
risk and possibility of inoculation with syphilis, whatever it may have been
heretofore, wholly disappears. On this point the Commission makes two
suggestions—that lymph shall be placed within the reach of all, and that no
parents shall be required to submit their children for vaccination by means of
anything but calf lymph."
.......Mr. Chaplin
failed to explain why a system of vaccination, said to be working perfectly, should
require to be revolutionised. Nor did he condescend to illustrate the wonderful
process by which all malific and extraneous organisms, which are known to be
present in the lymph in its crude state, are destroyed, and how, when the
potency of the lymph has been attenuated to the extent of no less than 75 to 94
per cent, by the addition of water and glycerine, it "retains its full activity
for vaccination purposes." Only Mr. Chaplin knows this secret, for those who
informed him certainly do not know how this hocus-pocus is accomplished.......CH
61
LEICESTER: SANITATION versus VACCINATION
BY J.T. BIGGS J.P.
Phasing out of arm to arm vaccination led to reduction in syphilis by 50%
This Act confirmed the concessions already
suggested in the Fifth Report of the Royal Commission,
and also some others. Amongst these, it is significant that the age for
vaccination was extended from three to six months, and that calf Lymph was
substituted for the humanised variety. This latter change was made, no doubt, in
the hope of reducing the enormous permanent increase in the infantile death-rate
from syphilis, which set in immediately after the first compulsory Vaccination
Act of 1853, which both doubled the vaccinations and raised the death-rate of
infants, from syphilis, by about 50 per cent. in the following year, 1854. CH 62
Few, if any, instances of smallpox in unvaccinated children
A yet more
significant and striking fact is, that since the Act of 1898 very few, if any,
instances of small-pox have been verified out of the millions of children for
whom exemption has been legally obtained, or remain unvaccinated. If there
are any such cases, how is it the Local
Government Board have never made them public? Surely, from their point of view,
it is just amongst this class that small-pox should occur. These children ought to
have been decimated ere now, but up to the present (1912) no report has been
published of the over-much prophesied and longed for decimation by which they
were to be swept away. Has it ever really been believed that exempted children
would be decimated? If so, why does not the Local Government Board instruct
Medical Officers of Health to keep a sharp lookout for these cases, and so once
for all dumbfound the anti-vaccinists? CH 63
Typical medical men--imposing vaccination on people who don't want it
So it amounts to this :—The Local Government Board has imposed a Vaccination
Officer on Guardians; obliged them to pay his salary ; instructed him to
prosecute, independently of contrary to the wishes of the Guardians ; won the
legal case where this power was challenged ; again instructed the
Vaccination Officer to prosecute ; he successfully prosecutes, and defaulters
are fined ; the fines remain unpaid ; distress warrants and commitment warrants
are issued to terrify the recalcitrants ; the said warrants rest
harmlessly in the pigeon-holes of the post offices; the children remain
unvaccinated; there the matter ends ! What a great and glorious triumph for
the Local Government Board ! ! ! The Vaccination Acts are completely ignored,
and are virtually repealed here in Leicester. CH 68
The conditions for smallpox
"One of the conclusions of
the Health of Towns Commission of 1842 says :—'The various forms of epidemic,
endemic, and other disease, caused, aggravated, or propagated chiefly among
the labouring classes by atmospheric impurities, produced by decomposing
animal and vegetable substances, by damp and filth,
and overcrowded dwellings, prevail amongst the population in every part of the
kingdom. Where the removal of the noxious agency appears to be complete, such
disease almost entirely disappears.' Dealing with the causes of small-pox,
Mr. Dudgeon wrote :—"A century or more ago four great causes of small-pox were
in full vigour amongst us—intramural burial, hospital mismanagement, prison
neglect, and lodging-houses for the migratory population. These causes have
become nearly extinct, and the small-pox has declined with their decline. Bishop
Latimer says :—'I do marvel that London hath not a burying-place without, for it
is an unwholesome thing to bury within the city. I think, verily, that
many a man taketh his death in St. Paul's Churchyard ; for I myself, when I have
been there to hear the sermons, have felt such an ill-favoured unwholesome
savour, that I was the worse for it a great while after. And I think it be the
occasion of much disease.' CH 69
LEICESTER: SANITATION versus VACCINATION
BY J.T. BIGGS J.P.
Medical
men fearmongering for not vaccinating
The feeling against compulsion, think, is universal;
it is regarded as intolerable now, and I do not think that any efforts of any
board or any authority—not even a regiment of soldiers—would bring about
vaccination by compulsion again in Leicester. I cannot say, of course, what will
happen, but I know that the profession have been expecting this dreadful
epidemic to arise in Leicester, which was to have a great effect in alarming
everybody, but it has not come. CHAPTER 70. THE CHAIRMAN OF THE LEICESTER
SANITARY COMMITTEE AND THE PUBLIC HEALTH.
LEICESTER: SANITATION versus VACCINATION
BY J.T. BIGGS J.P.
It does not redound to the credit of the medical journals that while they tried their utmost to arouse a scare throughout the country against "unprotected" Leicester, which had only a few cases of small-pox in 1887 and 1888, and these traceable to Sheffield, they were practically silent about the 7,000 cases and nearly 700 deaths which occurred at efficiently vaccinated Sheffield. Even Dr. Tomkins might well complain of such unfair misrepresentation CH 74 LEICESTER: SANITATION versus VACCINATION BY J.T. BIGGS J.P.
Medical man
belief in vaccination hard to shake off
On what he
calls "the well-worn subject of vaccination in relation to small-pox," Dr.
Millard published further figures relating to small-pox in Leicester (1902-04).
He says :—"The comparatively slight difference between the incidence of the disease on the vaccinated and unvaccinated
sections of the population is very remarkable, though it is important to remember that in Leicester the
vaccinated section is composed almost entirely of persons vaccinated many years
ago." (Pages 60 and 61.) "Whilst calling attention to these figures,
it is necessary, in order to prevent the possibility of misapprehension, to
again assert my belief, amounting to absolute conviction, in the efficacy
of recent
vaccination in protecting the individual against small-pox." (Page 62.)
CH 76
Interesting account of the severity of smallpox--what makes it mild or severe?
Leicester has established a
record in many things, and it would be difficult to surpass the variety of
small-pox which, according to Dr, Priestley, characterised the epidemic of
1892-94. It must have severely taxed the ingenuity of the Medical Officer to
conjure up such a mass of distinctive adjectives. Cases of small-pox are
described as being:—Mild, very mild, mild aborted, very mild aborted, mild
discrete, mild abortive, mild and abortive, modified, discrete, mild aborted
doubtful, very mild aborted discrete, severe, very severe, severe discrete,
con-fluent, severe confluent, very severe confluent, discrete coherent,
confluent coherent, modified discrete, discrete confluent, coherent confluent,
coherent malignant, confluent malignant, malignant, malignant undeveloped,
semi-malignant, pseudo variolous, defervesced, malignant haemorrhagic, severe
quasi malignant, very severe quasi malignant, variola nigra, genuine, very
severe confluent quasi malignant, and others. CH78
1892-1894 outbreak began with vaccinated cases and death rate higher in
vaccinated
We have had from the
beginning of the outbreak in 1892 to its close early in 1894, a total of 362
cases, which I distribute as follows:—"Unprotected," 154 (including one
doubtful); "protected," 177 (including one doubtful); "doubly protected," 31;
many of the two latter classes, as well as the former, being very severe cases.
The attack rate in the "unprotected" population was less than 1 per 1,000, while
in the "protected" and "doubly protected " classes combined it was nearly 21 per
1,000, being nearly twenty-four times greater than in the "unprotected" class.
The deaths all told were 21, of whom one was vaccinated, one revaccinated, and
the others are said to have been unvaccinated. Dividing these into three
classes—the "unprotected," "protected," and "doubly protected "—we find the
respective death-rates to be 109 per million living in the "unprotected," 159
per million in the "protected," and 270 per million in the "doubly protected"
class. Whatever comfort the pro-vaccinator may derive from these figures will
not be augmented by the knowledge that the outbreak began with vaccinated cases
and ended with vaccinated cases, the risks all through being from the vaccinated
to the unvaccinated. CH 78
Medical men (1885) using alcohol as a remedy, causing 17%
mortality instead of 11 or 8% without it's use
I shall be entering upon what is considered as a
sacred domain in speaking of the treatment of the patients at the Leicester
Fever Hospital. In my opinion it was open to criticism on account of the
liberal use of alcohol, and in the omission of other remedies known to be
beneficial, but not recognised in the pharmacopoeia of the faculty. I
believe most of the lives of the children might have been saved by the adoption
of these remedies. How long the public will submit to this medical perversity it
is not for me to say......Why in such a variety of conditions and physical
constitutions was the treatment the "same in all?" Champagne and brandy might be
moderately administered to old "topers" like the tramps, or even to strong
adults, without much harm, but would it not be calculated to unduly raise the
temperature of the children, increase their fever and delirium, and minimise
their chances of recovery? It must not be assumed that I am opposed to the use
of alcohol where it is necessary, but the following medical testimony is
valuable and significant, showing without its use a saving of nearly 50 per
cent, in the mortality. Dr. John Moir, L.R.C.P., Edin., Medical Superintendent
of West Haiti Infectious Diseases Hospital, writes:—
"That in the outbreak of the disease, 1884-85, two
thousand odd cases were treated by me in the usual routine method, with the use
of alcohol ......the average mortality of the 2,148 attended by me in the
West Ham Guardians' Hospital, in addition, to that of nearly 700 cases treated
by me elsewhere was 17 per cent. In the hospital ships at Long Reach, Deptford,
Dr. Birdwood, the Medical Superintendent, in 1886-87, treated the cases under
his care there without alcohol, with the surprising result that the mortality
was only 6 per cent. The results obtained by Dr. Birdwood determined me to
treat my small-pox cases since 1886 without alcohol, with the result that the
average mortality in the last 500 cases treated by me has diminished from 17 per
cent, to 11 per cent., and in the last 200 cases has been only 8 per cent. So
many apparently hopeless cases have I now seen recover r without the use of
alcohol, which, in my former experience did not recover with its use, that I do
not regret the substitution of safer remedies, and I should be afraid again to
treat small-pox cases with alcohol, fearing that the mortality might again rise,
and that my treatment was responsible for that rise, and consequent loss of
life. This record may encourage other observers to adopt the non-alcoholic,
treatment, and will most assuredly confirm them by their own experience of its
trustworthiness and superior efficacy." A result like this would have saved at
least seven out of the fourteen children. Here we may have an explanation of the
high temperature, delirious lever, and lengthened suffering which the Medical
Officer affirms distinguished the unvaccinated children.
Medical man contradicts himself in his report, and lies when he says matron
doesn't mix with patients
Much has been written about the "protection" afforded to the hospital staff
at Leicester by revaccination, and the dreadful punishment of the six refractory
members of the staff who wickedly refused revaccination when generously offered
by the Medical Officer. This subject well illustrates the spirit in which the
Medical Officer approaches the question. At page 109 of the Health Report for
1893, speaking of the hospital staff, he says :—
"The remaining six had only been vaccinated in infancy, and
were not, therefore, efficiently protected." This is all very well until
we remember that in the self-same report the doctor claims that many cases
escaped because they had only been vaccinated in infancy. To consider these six
unfortunate individuals seriatim, we find one side holds good until the other is
told. At page 109 of his report the doctor says:—
"The only one 'inefficiently' protected to escape was the
matron, who, of course, was not much exposed to the contagion, taking no part in
the actual nursing of small-pox cases, and only entering the wards
occasionally."
This is entirely opposed to the facts of the case. I have
myself walked many times all through the wards with the matron, and she has
freely gone in and out, assisting with patients all the time.
Medical prophecy!
I have reserved this most important part of the question until last.
Speaking of children, the Medical Officer, at page 67 of the Health Report for
1893, says :— "Under ten years of age, Leicester is practically unvaccinated,
and has suffered severely." Yet at page 99 he curiously observes :- "What would
have happened had the small-pox 'caught on' amongst children of that age period
it is serious to contemplate." He also predicts that in the future
"Leicester will suffer severely." Have we not for many years been medically
taught to believe that when infection came these children would "catch on" to
decimation? Yet after this outbreak it is still to be in the future. What a
commentary on medical prophecy! CH 78
Medical lies as to
smallpox cases unvaccinated
At a meeting of the Town Council held in January, 1893, the chairman of the
Sanitary Committee read a statement prepared by the Medical Officer, which also
appears at page 316 of his report, to the effect that he is "able to make the
significant statement that there has not been a single case of a vaccinated
child under ten years of age treated for small-pox at the hospital during his
whole of our epidemic." This has appeared all over the country, and the
"Lancet," of 20th January, 1894, refers to it in the following terms:—"Whereas
there was no instance of small-pox occurring in a vaccinated child under ten
years of age," yet, on looking at the list, I find no fewer than five small-pox
cases under ten years. Why was this misleading and untruthful statement made? If
this is a measure of the general veracity of the report, it does not say much
for its accuracy. As a sample of the alleged protection afforded until puberty
by primary vaccination, I find there are sixty-three small-pox cases ranging
from a few months old to twenty-one years, all of which were vaccinated. CH 78
Children unfit for vaccination, who die,
unfairly included in the
death-rate of the unvaccinated
in
It is also well known that in THE
BEST-VACCINATED COMMUNITIES there is always a residue of children, amounting to
at least 2 per cent, of the whole population, physically and medically unfit for
the ordeal of vaccination. The high death-rate of this residue is always
unfairly included in the death-rate of the unvaccinated, and raises the
percentage of the unvaccinated death-rate out of equitable proportion. This
residue furnished a large proportion of cases and deaths in the Sheffield
epidemic of 1887-88. Although the population of Leicester would afford us about
4,000 such children, contributing a large quota to the recent outbreak, we do
not wish to shield ourselves behind this zymotically susceptible army. CH 78
193 children died when 84% vaccinated, nearly all vaccinated. When
vaccination 12.9% only 14 children died
For the ten years ended 1872, the number of primary vaccinations which were
performed in Leicester amounted to an annual average of 84.3 per cent, to the
total births. Yet during the epidemic of 1871-73 there died of small-pox in
Leicester and its hospital, which was hastily erected on Freake's Ground, no
fewer than 193 children under ten, nearly all of whom were vaccinated.
This is a small-pox death-rate of 6,699 per million living under ten, and a
small-pox death-rate of 1,964 per million on the total population. For the ten
years ended 1893, the number of primary vaccinations which were performed in
Leicester, including its greatly enlarged area, amounted to an annual average of
12.9 per cent, to the total births yet only fourteen children under ten have
died during the outbreak of 1893-94. CH78
Medical men never believe in sanitation even after 40
years!
Dr. Millard utters a further note of warning, asserting that:—"Leicester
has succeeded in the past, not because she has abandoned infantile vaccination,
but in spite of having done so, and owing, as I believe, to the vigorous manner
in which she has grappled with small-pox in other ways." (Page 42.) Quite so, it
is these "other ways " which have accomplished the work. How long does Dr.
Millard think we ought to wait to demonstrate the efficacy of the "Leicester
Method"? Is not nearly forty years a sufficient length of time? Will Dr. Millard
and his professional friends wait that time before accepting any of the new
serums so frequently offered? Jenner and his Parliamentary backers did not wait
long before claiming £30,000 for the vaunted triumphs of "one mark" vaccination
! ......Seeing that the "Leicester Method" has stood
the test of about thirty years (1904), and Jenner's "method" was rewarded by
Parliament after doubtful and disputed experiments of a few years only, one
would like to know when the " conclusive" period is likely to arrive. An
impartial judge could readily furnish an answer. CH79
The medical efforts to make success out
of failure
It is most amusing to read the table of revaccinated. First of all, some
doubt is thrown upon the cases, as they are "stated" to have been revaccinated.
Then most of them did not "take," or the protection had lapsed through effluxion
of time. If they did not "take," the patient must have been immune. But it is
certain that if they had all escaped, their escape would have been attributed to
revaccination, at whatever date and under whatever circumstances performed. How
often have we been assured that protection lasts in some degree through life,
and that revaccination makes it doubly secure? There is nothing in the whole
realm of history or science that has changed so frequently and illogically as
this shibboleth of so-called protection by vaccination and revaccination.
CH80
Medical men try to create scare to
produce vaccine income, and make the Leicester method fail
In April occurred what the Medical Officer of Health describes as a
"cloudburst." Out of 65 cases, only one could be traced, and out of 156 cases
occurring in four weeks, 112 could not be traced. The sudden and untraceable
nature of the outburst induced the Medical Officer of Health to say that the
infection appeared to have "dropped from the clouds." Whether these 112 cases
started "de novo" or through contact remains unascertained. These incidents
prove how little is known and how much is conjectured respecting these
outbreaks. This outburst was a scare useful to the medical men. It gave a
combined fillip to vaccination and fees. On the Sanitary Committee determined
efforts were made by medical members to create a "scare," to rush into
extraordinary expenditure in the erection of additional buildings, and other
panic-stricken measures. Fortunately for the ratepayers, these interesting and
interested efforts were successfully resisted, and the town saved from an outlay
which would have been trumpeted from "Land's End to
John o' Groat's" as indicating a failure of the "Leicester Method."
CH80
Dr. Spencer T. Hall, of Blackpool, aged seventy-three and infirm, was overcome with emotion when speaking of the events of the preceding day. His tears, he said, were tears of joy and gratitude in having lived to see the vaccination question attain its present position. He had been vaccinated at two years of age, and very seriously injured ; but at fourteen he had a severe attack of small-pox, which was followed by improved health. Far rather would he have small-pox than be vaccinated. He had paid fines for all his children. In his long and wide experience he had never seen such evil results from small-pox as he had seen from vaccination. LEICESTER: SANITATION versus VACCINATION BY J.T. BIGGS J.P.
" This Act of 1853 was further amended by an Act in 1861 to facilitate prosecutions, but there are no records to show whether prosecutions actually commenced (in Leicester) until after the passing of the Act of 1867. This Act (1867), which is now cited as the 'principal Act,' not only amended but consolidated all the preceding Acts. Yet it failed to fully realise the expectations of its promoters. It was discovered that the appointment of vaccination officers was optional and not obligatory. To remedy this defect in the Act and more rigorously enforce vaccination, an amending Act was passed in 1871, the year of the Select Committee of the House of Commons on Vaccination.
"The transfer of the duties of the Poor Law Board to the Local Government Board necessitated a further Act of Parliament to explain the Act of 1871. Under this Act of 1871, which referred to the Poor Law Board as executive authority, it was possible for Boards of Guardians to evade their responsibility to the Local Government Board, which had succeeded to the authority of the Poor Law Board. Hence the Act of 1874, which established the authority of the Local Government Board in vaccinal matters over Boards of Guardians.
After the reading of this Memorial, a brief examination of the deputation followed. Since that date (1891), no change has taken place in the policy of the Board ; but in 1898 (nine years after the appointment of the Royal Commission) the Local Government Board authoritatively pronounced that the Vaccination Officer was independent of the Guardians, and could prosecute defaulters either on his own authority or that of the Local Government Board, the Guardians being treated in this matter as a quantite negligible.
The setting up of this claim not only led to a further strenuous struggle, recorded further on, between the Leicester Guardians and the Local Government. Board, but caused considerable difficulty and friction with Boards of Guardians all over the country.
There was only one case of small-pox, which came from Sheffield or Nottingham. The opportunity was too good for Dr. Tomkins to miss for supplying a proof of the advantage of revaccination, as this paragraph shows (page 10) :—"The usual prompt measures were adopted. The patient was removed to the small-pox wards, and two other persons who had been in contact with him were subjected, to 14 days quarantine, were revaccinated. both of whom escaped disease; the room he had occupied was thoroughly disinfected, and the bedding he had slept on destroyed