(Chapter 10 of Poisoned Needle plus addendums)
by Eleanor McBean
NOTICE: THIS WORK MAY BE PROTECTED BY COPYRIGHT
YOU ARE REQUIRED TO READ THE COPYRIGHT NOTICE AT THIS LINK BEFORE YOU READ THE FOLLOWING WORK, THAT IS AVAILABLE SOLELY FOR PRIVATE STUDY, SCHOLARSHIP OR RESEARCH PURSUANT TO 17 U.S.C. SECTION 107 AND 108. IN THE EVENT THAT THE LIBRARY DETERMINES THAT UNLAWFUL COPYING OF THIS WORK HAS OCCURRED, THE LIBRARY HAS THE RIGHT TO BLOCK THE I.P. ADDRESS AT WHICH THE UNLAWFUL COPYING APPEARED TO HAVE OCCURRED. THANK YOU FOR RESPECTING THE RIGHTS OF COPYRIGHT OWNERS.
CHAPTER X: THE HIDDEN DANGERS IN POLIO VACCINE
The following is a sample of the propaganda that is frequently seen in the magazines and newspapers and all channels of national advertising
GET POLIO VACCINATION NOW
To Protect Your Child This Summer
Your boy or girl will have the best chance for protection before polio hits again, if vaccine is given now. The Salk vaccine strikingly reduced paralytic polio among those who received it in 1955 and it will protect many thousands in 1956, if it is used in time.
To make a real dent in polio in 1956, vaccinations must be stepped up immediately. Success will depend on how many children receive at least two vaccine shots before the next polio season begins. See your doctor or public health officer NOW for advice about when and where to obtain vaccine.
This is what the people are told. Let’s uncover the facts and see what actually happens when polio vaccine is used.
"Salk vaccine is hard to make and no batch can ever be proved safe before it is given to children." This is an admission that was made by Dr. Scheele, (Surgeon General) before the Atlantic City Convention of the American Association in 1955. (Reported in New York Times, June 8, 1955.)
Being fully aware of the hazardous aspects of the polio vaccine, Dr. Scheele announced that it was the intention of the U.S. Government to inoculate 57 million people before August 1955. (Report from the Lancet, June 4, 1955)
SAFETY PROMISED WITHOUT INVESTIGATION OR PROOF
$9,000,000 of public funds were gambled on this financially promising but highly questionable venture before it was even declared safe and usable. Later, when the over dramatized announcement was made that it was "safe" there was still no scientific evidence or factual proof of its safety. The promoters of this inflated vaccine "scheme" expected a 5 billion dollar profit in the first year of operation. (Direct quotations supporting this statement are given under the topic heading, THE MONEY MOTIVE, at the end of the chapter.)
Even after the vaccine had killed 7 people and the number was mounting every day, the propaganda committee put words into the mouths of important government officials, still insisting that the vaccine was "safe" and must be continued.
The Cutter laboratory was used as the "scape goat" until the many disasters from the other laboratories could no longer be concealed. Then instead of abandoning the whole "deadly mess", the Cutter laboratory was declared in good standing again and allowed to continue—not because its vaccine was any safer, but because the vaccine from the rest of them was just as deadly, and none of them intended to stop or lose any profits.
Any doctor, scientist or authority on the subject of vaccine knows that these substances are "highly toxic" (poison), therefore, no vaccine can be made safe. Current magazine articles have described in detail, the composition of the Salk vaccine so it will not be repeated here except to say that the decomposed kidney tissues and pus from a diseased animal combined with the two poison drugs cannot be injected into the living blood stream without harmful effects. The records of the experiments on children show that more of the vaccinated people died or contracted polio than did the unvaccinated. The fact that all the vaccinated people did not die does not mean that they were not harmed. No one knows yet, what the future results will be.
James McIntosh, Professor of Pathology at London University, in an address before the Royal Society of Medicine, October 19, 1926, stated:
"Scientifically it cannot be disputed that every point of view the injection of virus capable of multiplying in the body of the individual is bad. When multiplication of the virus occurs, then there is no possibility of estimating the dose to which the patient has been subjected. Thus the effect cannot be controlled, and in susceptible individuals this may lead to unforeseen results."
Data from the bleedings performed five months after inoculation of Salk vaccine, indicated that the immunity (if any) did not last long. Dr. Salk is reported to have said that "children vaccinated last year should be given booster inoculations this year." An editorial in the Lancet (weekly Medical Journal April 23, 1955) comments: "If it is found that, contrary to Salk’s hopes antibody levels cannot be maintained without a succession of booster doses, then a serious problem will arise. Will it be necessary to give injections every year; and, if so, for how long would they be given? . . . If injections are given regularly for several years to millions of children the risk of allergic reactions to monkey kidney tissue will become increasingly grave." (Emphasis mine, McBean)
Dr. Ritchie Russell of the Department of Neurology, Radcliffe Infirmary Oxford, said, "When poliomyelitis is precipitated by inoculation the natural defences of the nervous system seem to be ineffective, and nearly all such illnesses develop into a paralytic form of the disease affecting especially the limb used for the injection." (Lancet, May 21, 1955, p. 1071)
The Manchester Guardian (April 15, 1955) stated, "One of Britain’s greatest physiologists said to-day that if it means that a child should be re-inoculated at frequent intervals with a preparation derived from monkey kidneys it is terrifying in its possibilities. Among them is the risk of the child’s developing sensitivity to some of the ingredients of the vaccine." The editor of the Lancet (June 11, 1955, p. 1207) emphasized this further when he wrote: "In addition to the possibility of producing the very disease the vaccine is used to prevent, ‘there is a risk, of unknown dimensions, that repeated injection of a vaccine prepared from monkey kidney may eventually sensitize the child in some harmful way’."
BRITISH PAPERS WARN AGAINST SALK VACCINE
In April, 1955 after the "big Salk campaign" had been launched in the United States, the Government and all officials and agencies concerned announced to the world that "the war against polio was almost certainly at an end."
The other countries are a little more conservative and a little less willing to be "taken in" by the sales propaganda of the Salk promoters. The general sentiment of our foreign neighbors was expressed by Dr. A. M. Payne when he declared: "Poliomyelitis is not beaten. We do not know how long the effect lasts. . . we do not know if it will be effective under other conditions than those in which it was used; we do not know how best to use it. We do know that there are many (unsolved) intricate problems in the manufacture of this vaccine." (Manchester Guardian, April 14, 1955)
"LONDON, April 22, 1955 (Reuters)—The British Medical Journal today warned physicians against over enthusiastic acceptance of the Salk anti-polio vaccine citing ‘the possibility of toxic effects’."
On this same point the Lancet said it would be "very reluctant to see the vaccine used on a large scale in Britain without further tests." It also warned, "the possibility of toxic effects from repeated injections with monkey tissues must be considered."
Caution was cast to the winds in this country and our U.S. Government and medical profession had no hesitancy in using the unproved vaccine and repeating their blundering tests on millions of human beings even after the large number of deaths and paralysis had proved it to be not only a failure but a dangerous killer. Most of the experiments were made on children too small to fight back.
A PARTIAL LIST OF DEATHS FROM SALK VACCINE
Susan Pierce (age 7), Pocatello, Idaho, died April 27, 1955
Ronald Fitzgerald (age 4), Oakland, Calif., died April 27, 1955
Allen Davis Jr. (age 2), New Orleans, La., died May 4, 1955
Janet Kincaid (age 7), Moscow, Idaho, died May 1, 1955
Danny Eggers (age 6), Idaho Falls, Idaho, died May 10, 1955
HOW SAFE IS SAFE?
1.Are the men who set themselves up as authorities on polio really qualified to decide the issues of life and death?
2. Have the self-styled medical "experts" been infallible enough in their past decisions to be trusted with the precious lives of our children and our future generations?
3. Have the more effective drugless methods of prevention and treatment of polio been investigated and tested?
These are some of the questions that people are asking and to which they have a right to expect satisfactory answers.
SALK "SPEAKS UP" IN LIFE MAGAZINE
In an article titled TRACKING THE KILLER, in LIFE magazine Dr. Salk was asked if his monkey vaccine was safe. To this query he replied:
"There is no question of ‘how safe is it?’ It is safe, and it can’t be safer than safe’."
Many people would seriously like to believe this statement but available scientific facts condemn it and hold it up to ridicule.
Shortly after the Salk vaccination program was swung into action, the American Public Health Service (June 23, 1955) Announced that there had been "168 confirmed cases of poliomyelitis among the vaccinated, with six deaths……How many vaccinated children will eventually be reported as developing the disease is as yet unknown . .
"The interval between inoculation and the first sign of paralysis ranged from 5 to 20 days and in a large proportion of cases it started in the limb on which the injection had been given. Another feature of the tragedy was that the numbers developing polio were far greater than would have been expected had no inoculations been given. In fact in the state of Idaho, according to a statement by Dr. Carl Eklund, one of the Government’s chief virus authorities, polio struck only vaccinated children in areas where there had been no cases of polio since the preceding autumn; in 9 out of 10 cases the paralysis occurred in the arms in which the vaccine had been injected." (News Chronicle, May 6, 1955)
According to the Daily Telegraph (June 18, 1955) Mr. Peterson, State Health Director of Idaho, stopped further inoculations and stated: "We have lost confidence in the Salk Vaccine." He also stated that he "holds the vaccine, together with the instructions for its manufacture, directly responsible for the outbreak of polio and the deaths that had occurred."
The serum makers were gambling for big stakes and decided that the "show must go on" in spite of death and disaster. The condemned Cutter laboratory had over a million dollars worth of deadly vaccine on hand and the disasters had caused its stock to drop from $15.50 to $8.75 per share, (according to Time, June 20, 1955). The other 5 laboratories with their $8,000,000 supply of "Salk liability" were involved also because deaths and disease were being reported from their vaccines every day. Then suddenly the deaths from Salk vaccine ceased to be reported. In a letter published in Defender Magazine, the writer stated: "I am informed by someone who works in a newspaper office that much of the bad news concerning the results of the Salk Program is being censored and deleted out of the news to keep people complacent and acquiescent."
SOME COUNTRIES REJECT VACCINES
In Australia when a few children died as a result of smallpox vaccinations the government abolished compulsory vaccination in that country and smallpox suddenly declined to the vanishing point. Australia had only three cases of smallpox in 15 years as compared with Japan’s record of 165,774 cases and 28,979 deaths from this cause in only 7 years (1886-1892) under compulsory vaccination and re-vaccination.
In Austria, where Bela Schick invented the Schick test for diptheria, it killed several children and the rulers there declared it to be too dangerous and prohibited its use in that country. Apparently Mr. Schick was not concerned with such trivialities as death and disease; he was out to make money. Most of the European countries didn’t trust him and rejected his poisons, so he brought it to America where he knew the unscrupulous medical and drug trusts dominate the healing field. Here he found a ready market. A lush harvest was promised and the customary pressure technique was turned on and the exploitable public was again used and abused. So we have seen with the passing of years, that the Schick test and diphtheria anti-toxin continue to take their toll of lives while our elected officers and public protectors (?) look the other way.
To show how death, disease and failure of vaccination is ignored in this country, in favor of fabulous profits for a few, let us recall one of the many disasters that bear this out:
In Dallas, Texas, 10 children died as a direct result of the "safe" diphtheria anti-toxin shots. For every one who died, hundreds suffered from the various vaccine diseases, many of which left permanent disabilities. This is not a special case; it is typical of all vaccinations. But most parents do not sue and the other cases never reach public notice. But these Texas parents were not to be "put off" by medical excuses. Numerous damage suits were brought against the doctors and the serum manufacturer, H. K. Mulford Co. The doctors succeeded in evading the issue by claiming that it was a bad batch of serum. (All serum is bad that doesn’t stop them). The Mulford Co. insisted that it was not a bad batch of serum but was just the same as all their serum and this lot (series A 377061) had been re-tested and passed satisfactorily all the tests and requirements conforming to the laboratory of the Public Health Service at Washington D.C.
The complaints of the parents were that "the diphtheria anti-toxin sold by the Mulford Co., was unfit, poisonous, dangerous and deadly." The doctors and serum company displayed great dexterity in juggling terms, inventing excuses and denying guilt but the children were still just as dead as a result of shots from the "whitewashed" serum as if they had been shot with bullets, and it was irrefutably proved in court that the vaccine serum killed them. Damages aggregating $78,000 were paid to the parents of the dead children, by the Mulford Co. The Mulford Co. wishing to continue in the same blood poisoning business and also wishing to dodge public disapproval, had its attorneys specify that "the judgement shall fall, not on the Mulford Co. but on Mr. Pierce Russell, the Mulford distributor." He was, probably, the least guilty of any of them because he could not have contaminated the sealed ampules of vaccines. However, his employer, undoubtedly made it worth his while—financially.......to take the blame. In this type of "white collar" murder, (the legally proved), guilty parties are not reprimanded or even asked to cease and desist" from a continuance of the crimes.
ALL VACCINES CAN CAUSE POLIO
"Mrs. Helen B. Covington, of Kensington, Pa. filed a $150,000 suit in the United States District Court, against Wyeth Inc. Philadelphia drug manufacturer, charging that an anti-rabies vaccine had produced paralysis" (The Truth Teller p 26, Aug 1947).
Dr William F Koch (MD, PhD) stated that "THE INJECTION OF ANY SERUM, VACCINE, OR EVEN PENICILLIN, HAS SHOWN A VERY MARKED INCREASE IN THE INCIDENCE OF POLIO, AT LEAST 400%. STATISTICS ON THIS ARE SO CONCLUSIVE, NO ONE CAN DENY IT."
The United States Public Health Bureau is extremely reticent about reporting diseases caused by vaccination but the report from 1922 to 1931 admitted that there had been 85 cases of post-vaccinal encephalitis, which DeKruif states "is the twin of infantile paralysis."
In St. Louis (1933) after a typhoid vaccination campaign there was an outbreak of encephalitis (a form of polio) in which over 100 died. It was reported that the disease developed about 10 days after vaccination and in each case vaccinia was indicated in the brain upon postmortem.
In 1926 two prominent English Professors of Pathology, Doctors Turnbull and McIntosh reported a number of cases of encephalitis lethargica (sleeping sickness—a form of polio) following vaccination. This led to the appointment of two — commissions of the British Ministry of Health, to investigate the situation. Their reports published in 1928 revealed that there had been 231 cases and 91 deaths from this cause (post vaccinal encephalitis) in England and Wales.
According to a report in the Hobart (Tasmania) "Mercury," (April 111950), "Combined injections for diphtheria and whooping cough may cause severe cases of infantile paralysis." It stated that a St. Pancras, London medical officer found 40 cases and that a British Health Ministry doctor reported 65 cases where paralysis occurred two weeks after vaccine injections, and in 49 of these, the paralysis was confined to the limb in which the injection had been given. Two of the cases followed the injection of penicillin. Dr. J. K. Marlin, from the Guy Hospital reported 80 cases where children developed infantile paralysis soon after having been vaccinated. "Mercury" stated that "the doctors realizing the danger of their findings to the government’s diphtheria immunization campaign, withheld publications until some of the cases could be followed up over a period of many months. Some of the children recovered after a year or more. Others are still paralyzed . ."
After the many months of observation of these disasters of vaccination the London County Council finally banned the use of the combined diphtheria and whooping cough injections in the clinics during the months when infantile paralysis was most prevalent.
Isn’t it appalling that the governments and the serum promoters see and know that vaccination causes paralysis yet they curtail it only during the months when polio is most prevalent. They still insist on having the revenue from the deadly practice the rest of the time regardless of the consequences. If they would care to observe the "polio season" they would see that it is only at the times when it is created by the doctors with their poisoned needles and the people with their excessive eating of sugar products and other devitalizing and semi-poisoned foods.
Dr. L. C. Appel writes: "The fact that vaccination is either the (a) adding of a disease to a body already weighted with disease, or else, (b) the giving of a disease to a perfectly healthy body, is the medical reason why some of us (medical doctors) oppose vaccination and urge its abolition. A perfectly healthy body is proof against natural disease; a diseased or unhealthy body is handicapped by being given another (inoculated) disease. A diseased or unhealthy body can never be rendered healthy by inoculation or vaccination."
Dr. Harry R. Baybee said:
"My honest opinion is that vaccination is the cause of more disease and suffering than anything I could name."
Dr. F. H. Haines voiced his views on vaccination as follows:
"It is impossible to say what remote after-effects may be caused by the introduction of alien substances into the blood stream. Many nervous and other disorders of unknown origin are too often met with. Products which alter metabolism, change the nature of fundamental secretions, cause profound change in the fluids of the body, allergy and anaphylaxis, are the negation of nature’s own methods, and must be viewed with grave misgivings and cautious suspicion." ("The Truth About Vaccination," by Lily Loat)
In an article in Archives of Disease in Childhood, (March, 1950) Dr. 3. K. Martin, of England, gives details of "17 cases of poliomyelitis which followed 28 days or less after inoculation." Analysis of the cases showed that 8 of them had been inoculated with A.P.T. Two had other injections against diphtheria, 2 had penicillin injections, 5 had combined diphtheria and whooping cough inoculations and 1 had whooping cough inoculations alone.
Not long after these cases had been published it encouraged other doctors to bring their findings out in the open and several other medical journals in Australia and England published articles which reported numerous cases of paralysis following vaccination. Two investigators, Dr. McCloskey, in Australia and Dr. Geffen in London both observed that "the point that struck them was that the paralysis started in the limb in which the injection had been made."
(Details of these findings are reported in the Lancet (London) for April 8, 1950 and The Medical Officer, for April 8, 1950.)
Two British statisticians were asked to investigate whether or not there appeared to have been any "Appreciable risk of poliomyelitis following within a month of inoculation during the 1948 outbreak of polio." The investigators, Dr. A. Bradford Hill and Dr. I. Knowelden, of the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, reported:
"The statistics collected in this inquiry reveal clearly an association between recent injections and paralysis . . . We must conclude that in the 1949 epidemic of poliomyelitis in this country, cases of paralysis were occurring which were associated with inoculation procedures carried out within the month preceding the record date of onset of the illness . . ." (Reported in the British Medical Journal, July 1, 1950)
Although the British government, under the pressure of Socialism has been forced to make many concessions in favor of the common people such as abolishing compulsory vaccination, making investigations that revealed the fallacy of many medical practices etc. Mr. Bevin, speaking in behalf of the medical fraternity in the House of Commons on November 24, 1947 still tried to protect the medical rackets when he stated:
"As I am advised, there are no medical grounds for attributing to vaccination or diphtheria immunization any connection with polio" (infantile paralysis).
The investigations of the Ministry of Health were not in agreement with this stand as is seen in its statement that "in the last few years there is evidence that occasionally followed vaccination."
A report in the Lancet (April 8, 1950) stated that Dr. McClosky of Melbourne had inquired into 340 cases of poliomyelitis which occurred in Victoria (from January to August, 1949) and found that 31 of them had occurred in children who had received diphtheria or whooping cough (pertussis) vaccine, or both, within three months of the onset of the disease. Of the 31 cases, 30 of them suffered severe paralysis which was most pronounced in the limb in which the injection was given.
The Medical Officer (April 8, 1950) reported the findings of Dr. D. H. Geffen who stated that in the first four months of that year, in St. Pancras, London, 30 children under five developed infantile paralysis within four weeks of being immunized against diphtheria or whooping cough (or both) "the paralysis affecting, in particular, the limb of injection. In 7 other recently vaccinated cases, paralysis occurred but not in the limb that had received the injection.
Dr. Arthur Gale of the Health Ministry reported (in the Daily Express for April 10, 1950) that he had observed 65 cases mainly from the Midlands’ in which paralysis developed about two weeks after an injection; and in 49 of these, paralysis was confined to the limb in which the injection had been given.
The report of the Government investigation (British Medical Journal, July 1, 1950) conducted by Dr. A Bradford Hill and 3. Knowelden revealed that there were 410 cases of infantile paralysis among children under five years. Of these 249 had been inoculated at the same time. Of 41 cases it was not known if they had been vaccinated or not. Of 35 cases in which poliomyelitis developed within a month of inoculation, the limb that had received the vaccine was paralyzed. This was usually the left arm.
The British Medical Journal (July 29, 1950) reported 112 cases of paralysis admitted to the Park Hospital, London during 1947-1949 in which 14 were paralyzed in the limb "which had received one or more of a course of immunizing injections within the previous two months. The interval between the last injection and the onset of paralysis in the majority of cases was between 9 and 14 days. The paralysis followed (A.P.T.) combined pertussis (whooping cough) and diphtheria prophylactic in nine cases, pertussis vaccine alone in one case, and diphtheria prophylactic alone in four cases. The paralysis, whether of arm or leg, conformed in general to a uniform pattern. It was not associated in time or place with any particular clinic or technique."
In all 14 cases, paralysis occurred in the injected limb; in 12 cases it was the arm and in 2 cases, the leg. This outbreak of polio followed an intensive immunization campaign during that time (1947-1949).
The serum makers probably had a surplus of vaccine to sell, as is the case in this country (United States) when the scare campaigns are engineered and the gullible people are stampeded into the vaccination centers to be "shot."
In Los Angeles (1946) after the largest smallpox vaccination campaign in the history of the city, an epidemic of polio broke out within two weeks after the "shots" and by the end of the summer there were 26 deaths from this cause and 1,900 reported cases. The County Epidemiologist estimated that there were —about 15 times as many unreported cases which would bring the count up to 28,000 cases. The report for the entire United States for 1951 was only 28,395. An average vaccination campaign nets the doctors about $2,000,000 so this one must have been tremendous in profits. The amount of the "take" has never been revealed. This Polio epidemic triggered off a "bigger than ever" March of Dimes campaign and the people were ‘bled" again for money to support the medical racket that creates more disease in order to scare the people into more donations and so the vicious circle continues.
POLIO FROM VACCINATION IN OTHER COUNTRIES
England, Australia and United States are not the only countries that have found that vaccination causes polio and its variations such as encephalitis, meningitis, and certain other diseases.
In The New York State Journal of Medicine, (May 15, 1926) reports were given of post-vaccinal encephalitis in several other countries. In a brief of an article by Dr. W. F. Winkler, of the University Clinic of Rostock, Germany it says: "Quite recently isolated cases of cerebral symptoms, suggesting encephalitis, following vaccination have been reported from Holland, Czechoslovakia, and Germany and from Switzerland there have been reported two cases of serious meningitis."
The (Aug. 27, 1928) Report of the League of Nations tells of 139 cases and 41 deaths. "This resulted in Holland stopping compulsory vaccination during 1928-1929. The total number of vaccinations in Holland in the first half of 1928 was less than one-third of those for the first half of 1927 and the deaths from encephalitis were reduced to less than one-third." (Vaccine and Serum Evils— Shelton—p. 15)
Germany modified her compulsory vaccination law, as a result of the increased number of polio cases that developed from vaccination. The International News Service, (Feb. 27, 1930) states: "The change of attitude of some medical experts towards vaccination in favor of a less rigid enforcement of the law has been brought about mainly through a considerable number of post-vaccinal diseases observed in Holland and England and in sporadic cases in Germany."
Dr. Carl Leiner, of Vienna reported cases of encephalitis and meningitis developing 9 to 15 days after vaccination. He admitted "that in a generalized infection, like generalized vaccinia, there may be intracranial complications." In autopsies, Dr. Lucksch was able to show beyond doubt that "death had been due to encephalitis." Dr. Bastianse, of the Hague, reported 34 similar cases which occurred in Holland during 18 months (1924-25) with a death rate of 40%. The Netherlands, France and other countries have also reported cases of this kind.
In an article in The Journal of the American Medical Association, (July 3, 1926, p. 45.) on "NERVOUS DISTURBANCES AND SMALLPOX VACCINATION," is stated, "In regions in which there is no organized vaccination of the population, general paralysis is rare. In patients with general paralysis, he (Dr. Daraskwiewiez) has never seen smallpox scars, but smallpox vaccination scars were always present." Various physicians agreed that, "It is impossible to deny a connection between vaccination and the encephalitis which follows it." (emphasis supplied)
In England (1923-1925) an intensive vaccination campaign was carried out which caused a steady increase in the cases of Encephalitis-Lethargica and similar diseases until in 1924 there were 6,296 reported cases with unestimated thousands of unreported cases. Liverpool was at least 50% better vaccinated than the rest of England and had about 100% more encephalitis. The physicians tried to direct blame away from vaccination by claiming that the diseases were due to "latent infection," "inherited weakness," or "special susceptibility."
POLIO NOT CAUSED BY LIVING VIRUS
The word poliomyelitis was coined from the Greek words "polios" meaning gray, and "myelos" meaning marrow, plus "itis" meaning inflammation. Thus the word means inflammation of the gray matter of the spinal cord or brain or wherever gray matter is to be found. Every cell of the body contains a small amount of gray matter but it is more concentrated in the brain and spinal cord. Inflammation results from poisoning, irritation and obstructions that interfere with normal functioning. This damage, decay and disintegration of cell structure may terminate in paralysis or death without any invasion of viruses or germs. Isolated germs have never been known to attack and cause decay and disease of any part of the body. It is the corrosive poison products of decay that form the body of the vaccine that does the damage and causes the disease. Germs, bacteria and other such organisms are a part of decayed substance; they evolve from it and are necessary ingredients in the life process of eternal change and conversion from one form of life to a related one. Vaccine poisoning is just one of a number of causes of polio and other diseases. The section on OTHER CAUSES OF POLIO will deal with the other main causes. Our concern in this section is to show that viruses do not cause polio.
Since VIRUS has been medically designated as the "official" cause of polio we should first of all agree upon some stable definition of the term. Some dictionaries define virus as a poison. If this were the accepted definition it would be possible for us to see the connection between virus and polio. But the physicians and serum makers prefer to imagine a virus that can fly around in the air and attack people. Any other kind of a virus could not be made to frighten people into making large donations and in being vaccinated in the hope of protecting against it. Without an "air-borne" virus to play with, the whole vaccine racket would collapse. Therefore, the people are constantly reminded that polio is "catching" and they must have anti-polio "shots" that are intended to build up "anti-bodies" (which are also mythical suppositions). Although the promoters of the virus theory of polio insist that viruses are living organisms that fly around in the air and cause polio, this has never been proved. This unscientific, unsound, and undemonstrated virus theory of causation not only has no value, but it might safely be said that it has had the opposite effect. The rapid and ungoverned spread of polio is largely due to the misplaced confidence in the wrong belief. The popular practice of combating a false theory, not only leaves the disease unchecked but it directs the attention away from the real causes and discourages true investigation.
WHAT IS A VIRUS?
The 1940 Medical Dictionary defines virus as "the specific living principle by which an infectious disease is transmitted."
This definition is vague and meaningless because there is no such thing as a "living" principle. According to the dictionaries, a principle is a rule, truth, law etc. and is not a living entity.
The Scientific Encyclopedia says viruses have been obtained for experimentation by means of extremely powerful centrifuges which must be specially built. In the same article it is stated that viruses are so small that they cannot be seen by the most powerful microscopes. Then how do they know they produced any? - -Or is this game of hide and seek just another means of using up the millions of dollars contributed to the March of Dimes program?
The Modern Encylopedia, (1944) says in part "A virus differs from a bacterium in that the latter can live and reproduce itself in an artificial culture such as beef broth, whereas a virus must live inside a living cell. It is because of the protection which the living cell affords a virus that serums are of no value in the treatment of virus diseases."
This shows us that as far back as 1944 it was known that virus vaccines have no value in treating disease. Yet these succeeding 10 years have seen more millions of dollars squandered and more monkeys and other animals and people tortured and killed and more propaganda built on the false premise that viruses cause polio, than ever before.
Webster’s Dictionary refers to virus as a "slimy or poisonous liquid". Pus is a slimy poisonous liquid and forms where there is inflammation and disintegration of tissue. This break-down and disintegration of life cells is not a result of invasion of germs or viruses but is due to the interference with the chemical balance that holds the structure in a state of normal functioning. When poisons from such things as vaccines, drugs, narcotics, contaminated and devitalized foods etc. cause degeneration of the cells and disease, the condition is usually labeled according to the location of the most decay. For instance, when there is inflammation of the kidney it is called Bright’s Disease; if it is in the joints, it is arthritis, in the stomach it is ulcers, in the lungs, we call it tuberculosis, in the pancreas, it is diabetes and when there is inflammation of the brain and spinal cord affecting the nerves and muscles it is called POLIO.
All cases of polio are not paralytic. Dr. Shelton discusses the subject in an article titled, DO PHYSICIANS CAUSE INFANTILE PARALYSIS? (Hygienic Review, Dec. 1944) in which he says: "I have never seen paralysis result in cases of poliomyelitis that had not been treated with drugs . . . They (the physicians) kill and cripple their patients with their suppressive measures and then blame the results on the ‘disease’ or on an unknown virus. The value of the Kenny treatment is the negative one of being less suppressive and less destructive than the battle-ax treatment of the medical profession. It does not cure more, it merely kills fewer."
"In 1908 Dr. Karl Landsteiner, Austrian pathologist, published his theory, still held today (by backward medical doctors) that it is a ‘virus’ that launches epidemic polio. A ‘virus’ is defined (by him) as a pathogenic, or disease producing microbe, the poison of a contagious disease. Landsteiner based his theory on the fact that he had been able to induce polio in monkeys by injecting them with nerve tissues from fatal human cases. Believing that ‘the poliomyelitis produced in experimental animals is pseudo-poliomyelitis produced by Pseudo (false) virus’. Dr. Scobey (in his research) reasoned that ‘the disease they produced in the monkey was an artificial disease and not a natural illness as it occurred in man.’ After exhausting medical literature in the form of case-histories of the subject in all lands and at all known times of its appearance, he concluded: (1) It has never been proved that the ‘virus’ of polio can cause that disease in human beings; (2) It has been proved that polio can be caused by cyanide poisoning." (Prevention Magazine, June, 1950)
Cyanide is one of the deadly poisons that is permitted to be used in insecticide sprays on farm produce. It not only poisons the food it is sprayed on but it is washed by the rains into the soil where it kills the valuable earth worms and other soil building organisms and renders the farm land sterile and unproductive. It also washes down into the streams and contaminates the water supply for both man and animals.
During one of our most widespread polio epidemics (1949) ‘contraction of polio by definite contact with other victims of the disease was not established in an elaborate study made by the New York State Health Department. The United States Public Health Service in its studies also found the same negative answer during succeeding outbreaks of polio. In short, they learned that the disease was not contagious." TIME Magazine commented on this unexpected revelation of these surveys by remarking that "when and where people catch polio remains a mystery."
The supposition that viruses entered through the mouth and nose led the experimenters to make exhaustive tests on both animals and human beings, mostly prisoners and orphans in institutions. They were exposed (by close association) to polio patients and their throats and nasal passages were frequently swabbed with matter (from the patients) that was supposed to contain viruses. No polio was produced in this way and about the only noticeable after effect was that the subjects of the experiments lost their sense of taste and smell due to the damaging effects of the poisons in the serum that was used on the swabs.
CONFUSION IN THE RANKS OF THE GERM BREEDERS
In spite of all the proof to the contrary, those who profit by the sale of vaccines are trying to make their theory ‘stick,’ but there is dissension and clash of conflicting belief for lack of facts to depend on
Dr Salk’s stand on his dead virus theory is reviewed in LIFE magazine in the article ‘Tracking the Killer’ in which the writer says Dr Salk has reason to believe that his killed virus when given m the prescribed manner—the third booster shot increases antibodies enormously—may even improve on nature" A confused little man with a batch of putrid serum thinks he can improve on nature
Robert Goglan (in the same article) writes: "Virus diseases, preventable by vaccination, (?) were found to be ones in which the virus was blood-borne during some early stage of the infection And this brings us to a basic dilemma that confronted polio researchers Nobody could find polio viruses in the blood of the polio victims at any stage"
This is an interesting point because the blood circulates through the body every three minutes carrying the purified arterial blood to the cells and carrying away the waste laden blood in the veins to be purified again If viruses caused polio then there would be some indication of dead viruses found in the venous blood and live viruses would be found both in and outside of the body.
What started the "dead virus" tangent anyway? It was disastrous effects of the previous vaccines that were supposed to contain live viruses that turned the people against this method of mass murder But the one-track-minds of some of the researchers were determined to hang on to the virus gimmick, whether alive or dead, so dead virus vaccine was invented
An account of one of the deadly polio vaccine experiments on living human beings may be found in the Journal of the American Medical Association, (Dec. 28, 1935, Vol 105 p 2152) The report was made by the Medical Director of the United States Public Health He says
"During the past year in the United States, several thousand individuals mostly children, have received subcutaneous and intracutaneous injections of treated poliomyelitis virus with high fatality" He describes 12 cases of which 6 died within 20 days of receiving the first dose of vaccine. Of the remaining 6 hope of recovery was doubtful. This was from (supposedly) live virus.
Here we see that the doctors were able to cause polio with serum (protein poisons) but they were not able to cure or control it. The report continues: "It is believed that, to many physicians, this series of cases . . . readers undesirable the further use of polio virus for human vaccination."
The deadly effects of the "dead virus" vaccine of Dr. Salk and the equally deadly effects of the "live virus" vaccines should close the chapter on polio vaccine but physicians "die hard" when there are large profits in sight. So a few of these doctors are still trying to revive the virus corpse by other concoctions. Dr. Albert Sabin is toying with the idea of a virus just between the dead and the live variety which according to the U.S. News and World Report (May 13, 1955) "would be tamed—weakened so it could no longer cause polio but could trigger the body into setting up protective immunity." (This would be laughable if it were not so pathetic.)
Dr. Richie Russell favors the use of live viruses taken by mouth instead of injection. He says: "It is certainly more effective than the Salk method, and may even involve less risk, for should an oral (by mouth) vaccine lead unexpectedly to a febrile illness, there are still many chances that no paralytic disease will develop . . . When, however, poliomyelitis is precipitated by an inoculation the natural defences of the nervous system seem to be ineffective, and nearly all such illnesses develop into a paralytic form of the disease affecting especially the limb used for the injection." (From—"The Story of Salk Anti-Poliomyeitis Vaccine" by Dr. M. Beddow Bayly.)
Dr. Russell admits the danger of injecting poison into the body and acknowledges the hazards of taking the poison by mouth but suggests that it would be a little less damaging in this way. This gives a choice of two risky, worthless methods with no proof of any benefits.
Poison always does serious damage no matter how it is taken, so why nurture the hope that any special brand of "virus" poison vaccine can ever be expected to do any good? If the physicians cannot comprehend this simple fact then the people will need to do their own protecting by avoiding all vaccines and the rest of the harmful practices of modern medicine.
It gives us hope to find a few doctors here and there who seem to be getting a clearer understanding of the situation. Among them is Dr. William J. McCormick who states: (Archives of Pediatrics, Feb. 1950):
"The associated virus is regarded as a biochemical substance produced by the disease, which, although capable of producing paralysis in experimental animals by catalytic chemical action in the nervous system, is not necessarily a means of spreading of the disease under ordinary circumstances."
Ralph R. Scobey, M.D. (Archives of Pediatrics, Sept.-Oct. 1950) tells us that "the so-called virus of poliomyelitis is considered to be an endogenous (growing from within) substance resulting from poisoning." He gives evidence in the article to support this claim.
J. E. R. McDonagh (The Universe Through Medicine) states that "the virus is formed within, and does not come from without."
A UP Release, (Sept. 8, 1950) reports the views of Dr. Joseph Melnick (at the International Conference of Biology) in these words: "He said studies have shown that the nucleus of the cells in the spinal cord may be the place where the polio virus is manufactured when the disease strikes."
The total lack of scientific evidence that viruses cause polio or that they can exist outside the body and attack from there, has forced the researchers to look within the cause of disease. When they (the whole healing profession) fully comprehend this simple fact there will no longer be any fear of germs and there will be no vaccines, disinfectants or other harmful germicides used. The healing field can then begin to make rapid advancement and disease can be understood and eliminated.
MONKEY TESTS ARE NO MEASURE FOR MAN
It is the blind acceptance of a false theory (of virus attack) that has promoted ~ and sustained the terrible slaughter of thousands of monkeys to make a vaccine that can never produce anything but disastrous results.
Even if vaccines were useful, an artificial laboratory disease induced in a healthy monkey by methods not experienced by man is not a dependable means of judging the effectiveness of a vaccine in a self induced cleansing disease of man.
Dr. Jean MacNamara in the Medical Journal, (Aug. 12, 1933) emphasized the danger of applying facts determined in experimental poliomyelitis in monkeys to the natural disease in man. He pointed out that there are "marked clinical differences between the pre-paralytic stage of poliomyelitis in children and in monkeys."
The Lancet (Aug. 19, 1933) discusses this same point by saying: "To draw analogies between the pathogenesis of poliomyelitis in man and the experimental disease in monkeys might lead us far astray."
John A. Toomey, M.D. (Science, 82:200. Aug. 30, 1955) stated that "the intranasal and intracerebral inoculation of the poliomyelitis virus in monkeys does not produce the same disease seen in man." In an article in the Journal of Pediatrics, (19:103, 1941) Dr. Toomey gives evidence to prove that "no animal gets the disease from another no matter how intimately exposed." For this reason QUARANTINE FOR POLIOMYELITIS IS USELESS.
Dr. Patrick Meenan, bacteriologist at St. Vincent’s Hospital, Dublin, states (Lancet, April 18, 1953) that "most of the recent work on poliomyelitis has been done on chimpanzees, which seem to react to infection much as man does." Of course monkeys and other animals suffer from induced disease the same as people but this has nothing to do with the cause and cure of disease. This realization is slowly filtering through the muddled minds of some of the doctors, which gives us some hope. Dr. Patrick Meenan shows us that he is getting a little closer to the correct understanding when he says: "The fundamental difficulty is to know how far experimental findings can be applied to natural infection in man. What is the relation between the disease in animals produced by large doses of laboratory adapted strains and that in man produced by small doses of naturally occurring virus? Is the pathogenesis of poliomyelitis in man the same as in the chimpanzee?"
Dr. E. R. Krumbiegel, City Health Commissioner of Milwaukee, Wisc. reported (Sentinal, May 24, 1955) that these tests on monkeys "do not rule out the possibility that small amounts of weakened polio virus which will not infect monkey tissues, may still be able to multiply in human tissues . . . Monkey tissues are not necessarily comparable to human tissues in this respect. This is exemplified by the fact that the amount of inactivated virus necessary to produce a good polio response in humans is far less than that needed in monkeys, and far less in monkeys than in mice."
These two doctors are still floundering around in the delusion of "virus causation" but they are discovering the fallacies and in time will probably emerge into the light. When they inject some of the putrefied protein which they call virus vaccine, into people it takes less of it to produce toxic poisoning and paralysis than it does in animals. This is not because man’s reaction to germs or viruses is any different from that of animals; it is because man is already on the border-line of toxemia because of the incompatible foods and poisons he uses, while the animals that live out in nature and eat unprocessed foods are strong and more resistant to poisons.
Dr. Alfred Byrne, in a scathing criticism of the Salk vaccine, in the Spectator for July 22, 1955, stated: "It is known that the monkey test for the virus is so crude as to constitute a source of danger as it will not always, by any means, differentiate between the presence of no live virus and live virus present in small amounts." He recognized the potential hazards to be so apparent that he considered it remarkable that there were not considerably more deaths and paralysis from the Salk vaccine. He wrote: "The deaths might have been multiplied ten or a hundred-fold."
If the complete records were made public we would all be surprised to find that there are so many more Salk casualties than have been reported.
WHAT DOES THE "SALK" IMMUNITY MEAN?
The U.S. News and World Report (May 13, 1955) in an -article on "Better Polio Vaccine in Sight" states: "The Salk vaccine, admittedly, offers only limited protection, though its developer believes it can be improved over the 60 to 90 per cent effectiveness shown by the trials last summer."
There is a wide margin between 60 and 90 per cent. Would any employer hire a worker who made mistakes 40% of the time and never improved over 90%? Would anyone run his business with such haphazard results? Yet the parents are urged to trust the lives of their children in the hands of "Salk serum shooters" whose most optimistic promise is for only 60 to 90 per cent protection. This is no protection at all. The protection among the unvaccinated is far higher than that. This means that out of every 100 who are vaccinated with the Salk vaccine, 10 can be expected to get polio. For the general unvaccinated population only one person in 4,000 (in U.S.) is likely to get polio and only one in 11,000 in England.
ARE DR. SALK’S FIGURES ON EFFECTIVENESS ACCURATE?
How were the percentages of effectiveness arrived at?
An article in LIFE magazine (April 25,) stated: "Although the test had beer carried out in 44 states, the most dependable results came from 11 in which 200,745 children received three vaccine shots and 201,229 got dummy shots to serve as a yardstick for the vaccine’s effectiveness. Ten vaccinated and 68 unvaccinated children caught laboratory confirmed cases of polio. This indicated (to them) that the vaccine was more than 80% effective."
It is apparent that this is not in any sense a true measurement of the effective ness of the vaccine. In the first place, if 44 states were tested why were the figures used in only 11 of them. The statement that they were more dependable no doubt, means that they were the only ones that were not too extremely condemnatory. If only the most favorable figures are used in a test the estimate is not accurate. In the second place, the dummy shots of colored water are not a fair "yardstick" because injection of anything at all even distilled water is harmful and often fatal. What was the coloring matter that was added to the dummy shots? Was it carbolic acid or mercurochome or was it food coloring which is a coal tar derivative and condemned as a poison by the Food and Drug Administration?
There was a high percentage of polio among the children vaccinated with the colored water. Six times more polio was caused by these dummy shots than by the vaccine. This certainly cannot be accepted by any sane person as a fair test of the effectiveness of any vaccine. The colored water plus the Salk vaccine produced far more polio and death per population than we have among the un-vaccinated masses. All this showed up in spite of their own "hand picked" records in which only the favorable reports were publicized. The Francis Report (statistics of the Salk experiment) upon which the effectiveness was based showed that the Salk vaccine seemed to protect against the paralytic form of polio in only 30% of the cases—on the average. According to that, 70% of those vaccinated could be subject to the worst paralytic form of polio. On the other hand only one person in 4,571 (in U.S.) gets polio without the vaccine.
It was never proved that the vaccine gave even the 30% protection. That was merely assumed from the faulty experiments and the "manipulated" figures. For instance (Salk Story by Bayly p14), "No case was considered as immunized unless it had received two shots of the vaccine. This means that a child developing poliomyelitis after the first inoculation and before the second one would automatically be placed in the uninoculated class," and would not be counted as a Salk vaccine casualty even though he died of the "shot". This probably accounts for the comparatively few deaths that were reported as a result of the experiment. This would also invalidate all the conclusions drawn from the figures.
Dr. Salk is reported to have said that "children vaccinated last year should be given booster inoculations this year." If the full course of shots failed last year how can they expect some more of the same failure mechanism to do any better this year?