Re: Re: Variola, Vaccina and Tb
I can find no scientific evidence in Midgley's response to refute, if
that was his intention, his statement that
"Heptonstall relates that Smallpox Vaccine has been linked to
I have no idea whether Christians saw all immunisations as "A Satanic
Assault on the Blood" in the days the links between TB and Smallpox
Vaccine (SV) were originally established. I doubt it's true now. I doubt
their views had anything to do with links between TB and SV.
He opines that if vaccination causes deaths from TB there should have
been an increase in TB when vaccination took over from variolation -
possibly of course but not necessarily and if one actually reads the
evidence provided one understands why - then continues saying "he would
have it that TB was declining in that period ...prior to anti-TB drugs and
BCG immunisation" and presents these as my arguments. When did I argue
this? I can assure Adrian that, although he may think he's a mind reader,
in this case he's (not surprisingly) off base.
To return to his opening gambit in which he probably refers to one of
my references - an interesting slant on Smallpox and Vaccination written
by a Susan Claridge and found at www.archetypeltd.co.nz/Smallpox.htm
Susan Claridge says that vaccination (with cowpox), as opposed to
variolation (with smallpox), carries/d a strong risk of TB. Using data
collected and collated from authoritative sources from during, before and
beyond the 19th century, she uses an old quote that "cowpox is not natural
to the cow, it never occurs in bulls or steers, nor in young heifers that
have never been milked; it is a disease of milking cows which has been
communicated to them from syphillitic milkers"...therefore cowpox cannot
induce immunity to smallpox (but perhaps for syphilis?) and actually
increases the probability of developing smallpox due to immune deficits
caused through cowpox vaccination - and seen in the 19th century when
cowpox vaccine led to the spreading of smallpox nationwide.
If that is not true, statistics, immunology, microbiology and
pathology ought to refute this; could Midgley provide the scientific
evidence for refutation?
Claridge evidences her claims through eg.
McBean 1959; "Comparison of symptoms and progression of cowpox and
syphilis are exactly the same, whereas the symptoms and progression of
smallpox differ markedly"
E. M. Crookshank, a renowned biologist; "Cowpox has never been
converted into human smallpox, their clinical history and epidemiology are
Hence the belief that cowpox is bovine syphilis - not something one
wishes to be injected with.
The TB link is derived from the statement "not only did smallpox
vaccination not prevent smallpox...it contributed to the spread of other
diseases, most notably syphilis and tuberculosis, but also leprosy,
scarlet fever, tetanus and polio....TB is a widespread problem in cattle
and it is only logical that in inoculating people with the pus from a
diseased cow, or from the vaccine lesion of a person already vaccinated,
that more than 'cowpox' virus was transferred. James Phipps and Edward
Jenners son, both guinea pigs for Jenner, both died of TB at 20 and 21
years of age having been subjected to multiple inoculations".
In order to disprove the link between 'smallpox vaccination and TB'
one has to compare rates for all disorders (scarlet fever, syphilis, polio
etc.) with cowpox vaccine spread. This has not even been done with MMR. We
have seen a string of epidemiological studies considering autism alone as
a possible outcome of MMR whilst ignoring public experience of MMR-related
ASD/PDDs, juvenile arthritis, epilepsy, asthma, allergies, meningitis,
SSPE, encephalitis, etc., potential outcomes of MMR vaccination which,
though surprisingly ignored by researchers, easily confound the
One requires scientific objectivity and clarity - could Adrian
Midgley perhaps demonstrate this by providing scientific refutation of
Susan Claridges claims?
Competing interests: No competing interests