RE: Fathers Talk About Their Unvaccinated Children and the Unbelievable Differences from Most Kids.
PROOF:
Smallpox vaccine, the first successful vaccine to be developed, was introduced by Edward Jenner in 1796. He followed up his observation that milkmaids who had previously caught cowpox did not later catch smallpox by showing that inoculated cowpox protected against inoculated smallpox.
SOURCE: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smallpox_vaccine
In the time of smallpox, a similar strain of the sickness cowpox would prevent others from getting sick if they got cowpox via working around cows, or by vaccine.
As your challenge stated:
Prove your claim, that vaccines save your life, in certain parts of the world, at one time or another.
So in Europe during the years 1796 to the late 1800s I believe and the proof shows, getting a smallpox vaccine was very likely to save your life.
"The mortality of the severe form of smallpox—variola major—was very high without vaccination, up to 35% in some outbreaks.[4] A method of inducing immunity known as inoculation, insufflation or "variolation" was practiced before the development of a modern vaccine and likely occurred in India, Africa, and China well before the practice arrived in Europe"
In China in the time from 1567–1572 the below information would also prove that a type of vaccine, or inoculation which is another word for vaccine. The case of smallpox vaccines would also have been praised as saving millions of lives.
In China, powdered smallpox scabs were blown up the noses of the healthy. The patients would then develop a mild case of the disease and from then on were immune to it. The technique did have a 0.5–2.0% mortality rate, but that was considerably less than the 20–30% mortality rate of the disease itself.
Now, don't get me wrong, the easy way to prove that there was a time and a place that vaccines were effective and the better choice is easy to prove yet... I will also have to state... this is no longer the majority of cases. Especially in the corporate world of the Big Pharma Companies all over the world trying to make a buck on the backs of the fear mongering they cause.
I do appreciate the challenge though, this was a eye opener and a fun dive into more information on the subject.
Have an awesome day!
~ @Timbo
First unfound claim:
Why was it successful?
Because of a second unfounded claim:
Any sources that back up this claim?
Also the second paragraph which deals with inoculation NOT vaccination I have to research their statistics and understand exactly how they derived them and from what populations, so wait for the follow up.
As it stands vaccination and inoculation are synonyms yet one bypasess (vaccination) the mucus barrier and another does not, so how is that the same thing? It isn't.
Source for this also? "The technique did have a 0.5–2.0% mortality rate, but that was considerably less than the 20–30% mortality rate of the disease itself."
How about this book detailing smallpox:
The Poisoned Needle
In the simple conventional/common sense how can inviting disease by inoculation prevent disease? Simply because milkmaids don't catch smallpox because (assumption) they have been exposed to cowpox, as if one disease could nullify another, and even more insane, a different animal's disease could prevent another animals similar disease, another assumption.
@timbo
I have found a newer edition of the 4th cited source in your wikipidea article over here:
http://nitroflare.com/view/CA9FF8B215AE805/Am-Medicine.com-180915-m4.pdf/free
It will be interesting to see exactly the statistics and the context and if they too are simply unsubstantiated claims or are actually facts.
Interesting, the 35% figure doesn't appear anywhere in the newer edition, but what's far more interesting is how there is absolutely a cacophony of assamptions and assertions based on conjecture without a shred of evidence, reading the section about fluoridation is laughable! Give it a try, see if you can stomach this "medical science", and please let me know if you have more "PROOF" because we both know that what you presented here is lacking in facts and hence has no basis to be called PROOF besides
Even more laughable
3%-40%? LAUGHABLE! Where are your sources? NOWHERE! Laughable!
a discrepancy like this is outrageous! And that there is no way to distinguish between the two yet... there is two!
And even more damning. WHERE IS THE VIRUS?! Nowhere! AGAIN LAUGHABLE!
Next..
Yes, yes ... I will have to do an articlw on the REAL history of smallpox.
What we have been told is mostly myth.
@timbo I posted the link to the pdf, did you have a chance to check my claims and the claims of the book? This is a snip of the smallpox section from the book just to show that I am not full of shit.
Indistinguishable... Hilarious, @canadian-coconut don't stop posting this, I took a hiatus from social media for a couple years and I am glad I did as steemit cannot censor us.
@timbo what do you have to say about what I pointed out?
I have been offline for 4 weeks. Just seeing this for the first time. What I have to say right now is that this isn't worth my time and I work a lot so I am not spending anymore time on this. Nothing personal just the last thing I want to do is sit here and argue with someone about who is right or wrong on a topic that doesn't have much weight.
Wishing you the best and good luck my friend! I do appreciate the time and effort you put into it and it is obvious you have a passion for this.
Have a great night!
I understand but that doesn't mean it doesn't have much weight, it matters very much because you decided to take up the challenge and I provided evidence of scientific/medical fraud and outlined the claims as unfounded. It's not about who is right and who is wrong, its inconsequential, it is about finding truth and exterminating fiction portrayed as truth.
Antibodies for immunolabeling by light and electron microscopy: not for the faint hearted
Read through that, the pertinent part is this:
It says in very clear terms that the method for gaining immunity through antibodies cannot be predicted, therefore you cannot hold a candle to the claim that vaccines work period, ever.
I see you have a passion as well or at least interest in this topic, why not take up the information provided and verify it for veracity and factuality?
What do you risk? Besides, don't you wish not to fall a victim to lies and propaganda? I sure don't want to see my fellow man mislead and fooled/bamboozled.
I read the first 2 lines of your comment.
Look man, it is a month old.
I didn't realize you did anything either, I commented a month ago on someone elses post, and you proved me wrong good for you. Can't be right all the time.
I'm glad you're back and just in time before the topic would have been locked and subsequently the replies. I have seen you change your stance from one of pro vaccinations to one of being a lot more open to information and critical thinking about vaccinations and it's effect and I respect that and wholeheartedly applaud you for that.
There's nothing wrong with being wrong because you believe otherwise! There is something wrong when you know you're wrong and continue on that path, don't you agree? Did you know that there are numerous cases of vaccine developers and researchers that have spent decades in that endeavor and then came to realize that it was all a big lie, found out that they had been wrong and changed directions.