The Facilitator’s Touch
Cigarettes Don’t Cause Lung Cancer and Vaccines Don’t Cause Autism: A Review of J.B. Handley’s New Book How to End the Autism Epidemic


cia parker


That is simply not correct. This is the article that Eindecker provided on differential diagnoses of polio in 1950. It is NOT correct that before 1955 any case of paralysis which lasted over 24 hours was diagnosed as polio.

Some doctors undoubtedly must have done so, from laziness, fear, incompetence, or the desire to procure federal payment for treatment, but the numbers of those who did is unknown, as far as I know.

As soon as the vaccine was introduced, numbers of polio victims plummeted until after less than ten years, even less than five years, there were almost none. Dr. Yazbak described a polio vaccination campaign which he participated in in 1960, in Rhode Island, I think, in which, as soon as the first large numbers of children were vaccinated, the numbers of children affected in that outbreak immediately and visibly plummeted, so that many fewer even came back for the second and third doses. The most credible explanation is that the vaccine successfully prevented polio. Otherwise, you'd have to find the thousands of children who continued to be paralyzed in the same or comparable numbers by the G-B syndrome, coxsackie virus, etc., which we agree did NOT, if at all, cause cases of severe, permanent paralysis. Or you could resort to a conspiracy theory, that the numbers of the severely and permanently paralyzed continued as before, but for some reason no one noticed them or was aware that the numbers continued being the same.


"This is a chart from Age of Autism from several years ago, showing polio incidence rates and how they corresponded to lead arsenate levels in the early twentieth century and, when it was replaced by DDT in 1949, how rates of polio rose to new heights, then how they plunged as soon as the Salk vaccine was introduced in 1955."

cia, the same year(1955) the Salk vaccine was introduced, diagnostic criteria for polio were changed. At this point cases had already declined a lot from the peak that we had seen.

Before the change any paralysis that last 24 hours was called polio. After the change the paralysis had to last for weeks to be diagnosed as polio.

You would have expected a dramatic decrease from changing diagnostic criteria alone.



India is one the last countries producing DDT and they also used to have the majority of global polio cases. Now they have the largest number of polio-like paralysis. I predict they will see a decrease of polio-like paralysis once they ban DDT and as always the vaccine will take credit for that.

"Production, use, and management. DDT is currently being produced in three countries: India, China, and the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK; North Korea) (Table 1). By far the largest amounts are produced in India for the purpose of disease vector control."

cia parker

Just last week I commented in a Disqus discussion saying that parents in India should be given information as complete as possible about the non-polio flaccid paralysis occurring there by the hundreds of thousands in connection with the Pulse oral polio vaccine campaigns being given there for the last thirty years. I said that the possible causes were three: 1) it is really polio paralysis after all, provoked by an excessive number of doses of live polio vaccine, 2) it is caused by other polio viruses not included in the vaccine: it has long been thought that the three strains in the vaccine, comprising many subtypes each, covered all of the. Strain 2, always the rarest and least dangerous, has been completely wiped out by the vaccine. There may, however, be formerly uncommon and unknown strains now filling the gap, or there may be mutated strains, or 3) it may be caused by other enteroviruses. These cases are usually much more severe than normal polio cases, while other enteroviruses have not historically produced the most severe kind of paralysis. That may have changed, however, with the vaccine depressing the immune system temporarily, and/or with more virulent mutated strains.

And then the parents must make their choice. They should be free to refuse any vaccine, free to choose homeopathic lathyrus sativus, or free to take the recommended number of Pulse vaccine doses despite the danger, or free to take either the injected vaccine (more expensive) or the oral vaccine given on the Western schedule as per the protocol of twenty years ago, before it was replaced by the injected vaccine.

However, in the US of the forties and fifties, the situation was different. DDT use was rampant, as was wild-strain polio. Many thousands of children experienced severe and permanent paralysis in ways which could be clearly differentiated even then from the polio-resemblers we have discussed. They stopped getting polio or being paralyzed within a short time of the introduction of the vaccine. I doubt it would be possible to know what would have happened if there had been no vaccine but the US had banned the use of DDT earlier. We will have to wait and see if polio comes back here if a lot of people don't vax for it, and, if so, how severe and crippling it might be since DDT was banned nearly fifty years ago. Maybe it wouldn't be a big problem, or maybe other chemicals in common use will turn out to be dangerous as well.

cia parker


This is a chart from Age of Autism from several years ago, showing polio incidence rates and how they corresponded to lead arsenate levels in the early twentieth century and, when it was replaced by DDT in 1949, how rates of polio rose to new heights, then how they plunged as soon as the Salk vaccine was introduced in 1955.

They show no decrease of polio before the vaccine. Year-to-year fluctuation are to be expected, but the main trend was still remaining high.

I agree that it was the use of agricultural and insecticidal chemicals which enabled the invasion of the polio virus from the GI tract to the blood and then to the neurological system. It's also probable that those affected had a physiological vulnerability which most people didn't have. Polio struck with no apparent rhyme or reason, often affecting and crippling only one child in a family, although often it was several. Only one person on a block. Only one person in a church. Only five children in a school. So it was the effect of several coinciding factors: the virus in the environment, exposure to certain chemicals, and the genetic physiological vulnerability.

Removing one of these factors was enough to stop the devastation caused by polio, the almost universal use of the vaccine. Silent Spring WAS published in 1962, as I said I thought several days ago, but DDT was not banned in the US until 1972. I don't know what the persistent levels in the environment and animals are now. But other chemicals permitted paralysis after infection with EV68 five years ago, and about 120 were crippled by it, about twelve died of it. I don't think we're home free. And we have still not identified the genetic physiological factor which permitted the virus to infiltrate the blood and nervous system in a minority of cases, which added up to a lot nationally.

No vaccine is safe. Every vaccine does at least some degree of damage. I agree with both those propositions. But if there were paralytic polio in town, you'd have to weigh the odds as best you could and make your choice. Dr. Moskowitz said that the polio vaccine was as safe as a vaccine could be. No, not totally safe. But if polio came back here and now, I would have to research both lathyrus sativus and the vaccine, how dangerous the current outbreak was, and I might decide that it was probably better to get the vaccine. You would be free to refuse it. I don't think anyone knows for how long immunity lasts in any particular person. I had too many as a child, and I let my daughter get it at 2, 4, and 1 2 months. Not the kindergarten booster. My daughter did fine when she had EV68, she felt very ill for a few days and I kept her out of school for one day, and she had a very severe, persistent cough for over a month, maybe closer to two months four years ago. And she suffered a little hearing loss in one ear. Then she got well. That might mean that she doesn't have the susceptibility to crippling polio, if the different viruses are similar in that way, but I'm not sure.



"Coxsackie virus may cause temporary mild paralysis. "Coxsackievirus 7 and enterovirus 70 can cause milder paralytic syndromes, usually without fever."

If only the polio virus can cause polio-like illness what is causing the tens of thousands of polio-like paralysis cases in india that are actually more severe than polio itself?

Wild-polio virus has been eliminated. There are more polio-like cases than in the past 30 years when polio was supposed to be endemic.

How is that possible?



"In the worst year, 1952, there were 52,879 cases with 21,269 cases of paralysis. The year before the vaccine was introduced, 1954, there were 38,476 cases reported with 18,303 cases of paralysis. All diseases have fluctuations over time"

Look at the graph. Polio cases had dropped 75% before the vaccine had been introduced. What makes you believe they wouldn't have dropped further?

"Eindecker provided a very interesting article from 1950 on the differential diagnosis of polio used at that time. It is not the case that everything which could cause paralysis was often mistaken for polio. "
Eindecker didn't really provide anything that suggested that.

"Dr. Rustein specified that there aren't many causes other than polio which can cause paralysis concomitant with infectious disease"

Yes but back then it would have been diagnosed as Polio.

"Aseptic meningitis is not a disease, but a condition which can be caused by many diseases. But it is usually mild and self-limiting, and not responsible for more than mild, usually temporary paralysis."

Correct but it would have been diagnosed as polio back then.

"But severe paralysis occurring with symptoms of contagious illness, especially during an epidemic, and with characteristic symptoms (see Eindecker's article to see the sophistication of polio diagnosis even in 1950), "

At the height of the polio epidemic this was not how the diagnosis was made in practice.

"You cannot say that because there were "only" 38,500 cases of diagnosed polio in 1954, with "only" 18,303 cases of paralysis, that polio was "obviously" on the way out. Now look at statistics for the years after 1955. 1956: 15,140 cases diagnosed, 7,911 cases of paralysis. "

Look at the graph. It had already declined 75% from it's peak. The vaccine didn't accelerate the decline.

cia parker

Sorry, I didn't see where I had mentioned Guillain-Barré syndrome, but had meant to, so I wound up mentioning it twice.

cia parker


I found a site with statistics for polio cases and paralysis from 1952 into the sixties.

In the worst year, 1952, there were 52,879 cases with 21,269 cases of paralysis. The year before the vaccine was introduced, 1954, there were 38,476 cases reported with 18,303 cases of paralysis. All diseases have fluctuations over time. Pertussis only peaks every three and a half to four years, and it would be inaccurate to say that a lower number of cases in between peak years means that the disease is on its way out. The worst year was only three years before the year the vaccine was introduced. The numbers at this site are much higher than yours.

Eindecker provided a very interesting article from 1950 on the differential diagnosis of polio used at that time. It is not the case that everything which could cause paralysis was often mistaken for polio. Dr. Rustein specified that there aren't many causes other than polio which can cause paralysis concomitant with infectious disease. Guillain-Barre syndrome, for instance: "Similar, in that it may also be preceded by viral syndrome such as gastroenteritis. However, any limb weakness is usually symmetric, and cranial nerve weakness may be present as well. Other differentiating symptoms include those of autonomic dysfunction, which are not typical of poliomyelitis."

Aseptic meningitis is not a disease, but a condition which can be caused by many diseases. But it is usually mild and self-limiting, and not responsible for more than mild, usually temporary paralysis.
"Aseptic meningitis is an illness characterized by serous inflammation of the linings of the brain (i.e., meninges), usually with an accompanying mononuclear pleocytosis. Clinical manifestations vary, with headache and fever predominating. The illness is usually mild and runs its course without treatment; however, some cases can be severe and life threatening.
Aseptic meningitis syndrome is not caused by pyogenic bacteria. Although it is usually caused by certain viruses, it has a number of other etiologies as well, both infectious and noninfectious"

Coxsackie virus may cause temporary mild paralysis. "Coxsackievirus 7 and enterovirus 70 can cause milder paralytic syndromes, usually without fever."

In Guillain-Barre syndrome, paralysis is usually symmetrical, whereas in polio it is usually asymmetrical. "any limb weakness is usually symmetric, and cranial nerve weakness may be present as well." These are diagnostic criteria which would not have been lost on the professionals of the forties and fifties.

But severe paralysis occurring with symptoms of contagious illness, especially during an epidemic, and with characteristic symptoms (see Eindecker's article to see the sophistication of polio diagnosis even in 1950), which resulted in severe, permanent paralysis, was usually polio. Polio causes lesions in the anterior horn cells of the spinal cord and medulla obligata which are distinctive and characteristic.

You cannot say that because there were "only" 38,500 cases of diagnosed polio in 1954, with "only" 18,303 cases of paralysis, that polio was "obviously" on the way out. Now look at statistics for the years after 1955. 1956: 15,140 cases diagnosed, 7,911 cases of paralysis. Because everyone and his dog had gotten the vaccine as soon as it was available, and there were 10,392 fewer cases of paralysis in 1956 compared to 1954, only two years before. In 1957, incidence had dropped to 5,485 cases, with 2,499 cases of paralysis. In 1960 it was 3,190 cases with 2,595 cases of paralysis. And in a few more years, it was gone.


cia, look here. Polio cases had already declined 75% when the vaccine became available. 13000 cases were registered that year. Today there are a bit less than 10000 cases of GBS, Transverse Myelitis and tens of thousands of aseptic meningitis cases.


cia, look at what happened in India. In the past 25 years polio-like paralysis has not decreased actually it looks like it is more common now despite the most aggressive vaccination program the world has ever seen.

cia parker


Give your statistics for children paralyzed by polio or a polio look-alike in the US here and now, including adjustment for population growth. We had this discussion here years ago, and Dan Olmsted said that it was simply not true that there is as much childhood paralysis now as in the years before the polio vaccine. If you think there is, support it.

cia parker

Hans Litten,

You are doing exactly what the provaxxers do when they say, "But look at all the lives saved by X vaccine's having prevented X number of cases and X number of deaths from this disease! Don't look at the lives destroyed by vaccine damage caused by X vaccine!"

We should not show callousness toward any suffering caused by either any disease or any vaccine. I read The Virus and the Vaccine. Of course it was, and is, terrible that an oncogenic simian virus was inadvertently injected into or swallowed by, millions of polio vaccine recipients, and that it has caused cancer in many. But that in itself doesn't tell us to never, ever use the polio or any other vaccine. Every vaccine and every disease has risks, many known and many unknown. We have to make any decision bearing that in mind.

This should not be a team sport. It is unconscionable to say that because of serious and universally-acknowledged problems like the Cutter incident, SV40 virus, NPAFP in India from frequent Pulse oral polio vaccine distribution (no value judgment given, they are in a very difficult situation with widespread poverty and endemic polio uncontrolled by the Western protocol), polio paralysis sometimes (rarely) caused by the oral vaccine, and many other adverse reactions, up to and including death, that those obviously trump the prevention of thousands of cases of permanent paralysis and often death caused by polio. They are all information which is valuable and which should be considered. We have no polio here and now in developed countries thanks to the vaccines. If a lot of people stop vaxxing (and I think it is reasonable to not vax for polio in our current situation), then polio might come back, and there are enough chemicals in our environment that I cannot foresee how dangerous it would be if it did.

But what I can say is that no one should say Yay, no one is vaccinated for this disease, who cares about those who die or are disabled by the disease? Nor should they say Yay, EVERYONE is vaxxed for this disease, who cares about those disabled or killed by the vaccine? These are complex issues, and all I can say is that there must be free and informed choice.

Hans Litten

Eindecker & CIA

I think its hugely disrespectful to all the millions of people worldwide that have died of cancer after and due to the contaminated polio sv40 salk vaccine. (source Maurice Hilleman)


"Getting back to a reasonable discussion Hera what's your explanation for polio being effectively eliminated in the UK over a period of 7-8 years following the use of vaccines following 15 years of 1000's of cases being notified?"

They were renamed. What do you think has happened to *overall* rates of paralysis [from disease if you like] since the polio vaccine?

But why don't you tell me this Eindecker - and we both know you will avoid the question and just poison the well instead - do doctors use a risk assessment when they make their diagnoses? And if so, do [most] doctors believe vaccine status changes your risk of having a disease?

If you answer no to either of these questions then you're a liar. If you answer yes, then you've admitted that the entire apparent fall in every single so-called VPD may be nothing more than a self-fulfilling prophecy.

But we both know you won't dare answer them will you?


And all of this is corroborated by Census data for overall disability rates that shows that childhood disability rates have increased tenfold since that time (adults have increased fivefold).

Not to mention a quadrupling in per GDP healthcare spending.

There is nothing more to it.

The age of vaccines is the age of crippling and misery.

They serve no purpose. They don't and can't work. Viruses don't even infect us on an acute basis (Eindecker or Cia will never address this question) so the very idea of immunity to them is abject nonsense.

They are extremely dangerous and nobody - not even Eindecker - would ever dare take the equivalent (in terms of safety) dose that babies are expected to get.


Paralysis today is suffered by around one in 50 Americans.

Of those, around 40 per cent suffer from paralysis from something other than accidents or stroke.

So that means around 2 million Americans have paralysis from disease (this is from a massive survey done by the Christopher Reeve Foundation).

Paralytic polio before the vaccine was around 10,000 cases per year. Most recovered so at the very most, there may have been around 100,000 cases of people paralysed from polio at any one time before the vaccine.

That is one twentieth the amount of those with disease caused paralysis today (one tenth if you factor in population growth).

Of course, there would have been people in 1950 with paralysis diagnosed with other diseases but given we are told that polio was the great plague of that time we have to assume those were all relatively trivial.

In short, disease caused paralysis has almost certainly skyrocketed since the polio vaccine.


"RTP just read again what I wrote "It's quite clear that a final diagnosis of polio was dependant on a battery of clinical and laboratory tests, way back in 1950.", now where did I write "there he is claiming that every single polio diagnosis in history bar none was made using lab tests and nothing else.", now RTP who's lying???"

So now you admit that many polio diagnoses in history have indeed been made without lab tests?

Good to know.

What was your point again Eindecker? It slipped my mind for some reason.

The article you linked to proved that your position is a lie. It explicitly showed that at the time:

a) lab tests were nigh on useless;

b) these nigh on useless lab tests were irregularly used and there was no consistent standard of using them; and

c) the clinical symptoms varied widely.

In short, every single polio diagnosis was all just about the doctors' feelings. Nothing else.

Today, the non-diagnosing of polio is all about doctors' feelings too. They all feel like the vaccine has worked miracles.

Still I give you some credit though.

This is the first time ever where after having been shown to be dishonest you haven't immediately gone on a well poisoning mission with me.

I'm sure you will get there though.

cia parker


If I understand correctly, Hera is saying that the problem was often to usually not caused by polio, and that those who would have previously been diagnosed with polio, continued to be crippled and so on, by the polio look-alikes, presumably in numbers comparable to before, unless rates of GBS, coxsackie, or whatever went down for reasons of their own. But that polio wasn't eliminated, possibly that it was never a problem to start with, DDT or not, and that the vaccine didn't work to start with. Didn't she say that the doctors had nothing else to offer so they just tried to say that the vaccine was effective and would probably stop the problem? But that that was not the case?

Hera and Eindecker, please correct me if I am wrong and explain it to me better if possible. To me it seems very hard to believe a narrative which denies that any vaccine is ever of any use in saving lives. And I FULLY acknowledge that most vaccines given now do more harm than good. Even that the polio vaccine is not necessary in the US now, unless and until it comes back, and then I'd recommend that all parents consider it. And it's sad that so harrowing and ultimately triumphant an episode in our history should be dismissed now as having been nothing. That the damaged children are just the same now as before the vaccine, we just don't pay attention to them now. Our society really pulled together for some years to try in many ways to solve the problem and save children's lives and mobility.

cia parker

Thank you, Eindeker! That is a wonderful article! I was afraid for a minute that the one page would be all I could get without paying, but there was a link to the complete article and I have saved both links to my desktop. Exactly! Physicians in 1950 were just as intelligent and conscientious as a certain number still are, were able to write, understand, and use articles as technical physiologically as this one, and were WELL aware of the need to make a differential diagnosis, as several diseases could share some of the same symptoms as polio.

I have not been able to find charts of the numbers of those permanently crippled by polio by year. I found just one mention of cases diagnosed along with deaths and cases of permanent paralysis in an article on the epidemic in 1952. Do you have access to such a chart? I'm holding The Polio Years in Texas now, by Heather Green Wootan, and it has charts with cases diagnosed and deaths, but not permanent disability. But these charts show how huge a health crisis polio was, and I see that I was mistaken when I said it rarely caused death. The percentage of cases in which polio killed is given for each year 1915-60, and before the vaccine it's higher than I thought. 36.6% in 1920, 15.5% in 1930, 10.5% in 1940, 5.7% in 1950, n/a in 1960, because the vaccine wiped it out.

The numbers are stunning. 1946: 25,698 cases reported, 1,845 deaths; 1949: 42,033 cases, 2,720 deaths; 1955: 28,985 cases, 1,043 deaths. And they stopped once all children had received the vaccine. If you think that the same number of apparent polio cases and deaths continued but were really something else, can you provide the charts showing how many were crippled by or died from coxsackie or whatever? Was it tens of thousands a year, with a thousand or more deaths from it, whatever it was?

Do you really think that there continued to be just as many crippled children in the US after the vaccine as before? Presumably still, as there continues to be no treatment for coxsackie or GBS. And aseptic meningitis, often posited as a polio look-alike, does not cause paralysis. It would mean that tens of thousands of cases of lab-verified polio were incompetently or fraudulently diagnosed.

I'm looking for the passage I mentioned last night. Can anyone think of a modern-day scenario in which hundreds of patients are swamping a hospital all at once during what has been announced as a polio epidemic, dozens of them with lungs paralyzed by polio, and they are popped in and then out of the iron lungs as, one after another, they died? Even if you were to say that NOW we have advanced machines for respiratory support, is there any place swamped with dozens at a time requiring such support?

I thin this is extremely disrespectful of all those who suffered horribly and died or were crippled for life, like my friend and former dorm roommate Tina Frank, who started a support group for polio survivors. Not many remember them now, most suppliers of the equipment they need have stopped making or selling them, because all their customers are dead or presumed to be close to death. And years after their original suffering, many like her have post-polio syndrome, in which the muscles which had been rehabilitated to some degree wear out prematurely and revert to paralysis. That's why she can no longer use her braces and crutches.


RTP just read again what I wrote "It's quite clear that a final diagnosis of polio was dependant on a battery of clinical and laboratory tests, way back in 1950.", now where did I write "there he is claiming that every single polio diagnosis in history bar none was made using lab tests and nothing else.", now RTP who's lying???

Getting back to a reasonable discussion Hera what's your explanation for polio being effectively eliminated in the UK over a period of 7-8 years following the use of vaccines following 15 years of 1000's of cases being notified?


Just to follow up; Yes, abnormal spinal fluid is present in DDT poisoning too

For a definition of the title
( It means increased protien in the spinal fluid)

So toxic poisoning DDT poisoning would also fit the "abnormal spinal fluid" criteria


sorry we wrote at the same time. In response; actually abnormal spinal fluid, even if actually done at every hospital on every "polio" patient and found in every case, which it wasn't, is in no way differential
Abnormal Spinal fluid is present in
Giulliame Barre
Multiple Sclerosis
Possibly also toxic exposures (though got to check into that some more)

in fact, pretty well anything that causes paralysis...


Hera here's the reality of polio epidemiology in the UK and its elimination following the introduction of first the Salk vaccine and then the Sabin vaccine: in 7 or 8 years the disease was conquered following 15 years of large scale outbreaks of polio after WW2 look at Fig 26.1 on page 314. Just to remind you the UK has the state funded NHS, there was no financial incentive for reporting polio cases or health insurance complications.


"Until such time as a quick, accurate, specific laboratory test becomes available the diagnosis of poliomyelitis must depend upon the clinical evaluation of the history, symptoms, physical signs and laboratory aids currently available."

That's what Eindecker's article says.

In short, lab testing often wasn't available in any means and even when it was it was largely to be ignored.

And yet here Eindecker is telling us all the exact opposite as though it's perfectly ok to lie about such things.

It's not Eindecker.

It's really not.


Why is Eindecker free to disseminate his lies here without checks?

He never tells the truth.

Not once.

His article specifically says there wasn't even an accurate pathology test available at the time and therefore all diagnoses had to be made on clinical grounds but there he is claiming that every single polio diagnosis in history bar none was made using lab tests and nothing else.

Eindecker lies.


Cia parker, I think you are missing the point.We are reading what doctors who were there at the time were saying about what the diagnostic criteria they were using, actually was.
Dr Greenberg and the journal are quotes from the actual time of "polio"
The doctors who diagnosed "any old thing" as polio were only following the actual diagnostic criteria they were given to use. Are you really saying that even though the diagnostic criteria prior to vaccinations, for polio was specifically paralysis, two tests, 24 hours apart, ( no lab tests, no residual paralysis required) they should have said, no. Even though that is the current diagnostic criteria, ( and will get us government funding for medical care) we are not going to use it?
Why would they not use the then medically accepted criteria they were given?
And when the criteria changed following vaccination, now requiring residual paralysis, lab tests, and 28 or more days paralyzed, were the the doctors going to say " no, we'll be committing fraud here and diagnosing polio on 24 hours of paralysis only?
But reputable doctors like Dr Greenberg did say at the time, hey guys, this doesn't make sense statistically.
That's what the links I gave you were from; actual doctors at that time, who I agree did indeed know what they were doing.
Why would they still promote vaccines? Whether they worked much or not, what else did they have to offer?Of course, provocation polio caused by vaccines stopped some doctors from using vaccinations anyway. (Ironically, that may also have lead to increased health, due to the fact that DTP vaccine seems to cause increased death in malnourished populations.)

Re why no more iron lungs? Simple. Because we don't use them. We use positive pressure ventilation, which looks a lot like an oxygen mask. You can google it. You can use it at home. Also, we now have as a specialty respiratory therapists, who help wean people off outside ventilation. In fact, we do better physical rehab and lung all the way around.
( Sticking someone in an iron lung, not attempting to wean them off, and not doing physical therapy, would be designed to have a bad outcome.)

As it though, positive pressure ventilation is normally used for the 30% of Guilliame Barre paralysis victims who go through a stage of being unable to breathe for themselves. Just because our version of the iron lung is small , portable and you can go home with it, doesn't mean it does not exist.

referencing the use of positive pressure ventilation, the requirement for it for several weeks in aprox 30% of GB patients, , and the challenges of weaning the patient off it

"The requirement for non‐invasive ventilation was continuous at first; periods of only a few minutes without it resulted in hypoxia and respiratory distress. The ventilatory settings varied little during this period (inspiratory pressure 10–15 cm H2O, expiratory pressure 5 cm H2O). Between days 7 and 14, the patient tolerated periods of continuous positive airway pressure and periods breathing oxygen via a high flow oxygen delivery facemask. No problems with mask fit were encountered; pressure areas on the bridge of the nose required an adhesive dressing. The decreasing ventilatory requirement was reflected in a gradual improvement in vital capacity. Power in all limbs improved and the patient was able to stand briefly with the aid of physiotherapy staff."

And that is a description of a patient with "Guilliame Barre", not a patient with polio.


Cia & Hera there is a detailed description of the diagnosis and differential diagnosis of of cases reported as polio, written in 1950 giving procedures followed in Los Angeles. It's quite clear that a final diagnosis of polio was dependant on a battery of clinical and laboratory tests, way back in 1950. Please note author's comment that "abnormal changes in the CSF are present in 80 to 90% of cases of recognisable polio" p32

cia parker

I just realized I had given the wrong link when I tried to go to Dr. Rustein's article from what I put up here. The correct link is:

It is patronizing to act as though we now know much, much more than the benighted, ignorant people of previous generations. That is what the pro-vaxxers do when they say that autism has always been around in the same numbers, but people ten to a hundred years ago were too st-pid to realize that it wasn't normal for children to grow up unable to speak or socialize in what had always been the normal way developmentally. And so they didn't mention them, didn't write about them, just passed them along from grade to grade at school, without even realizing that it wasn't normal for them to be screaming or beating their heads on the wall, or warehoused them in institutions which no one is able to identify or explain who paid for their care in the numbers required.

But it is also what we do when we say that doctors in the '50s were too st-pid to recognize that most of the children presenting with flu-like symptoms, some of whom were permanently paralyzed, really had nothing to do with the viral disease polio. That people were just once again deceived when they just THOUGHT that the disappearance of polio after the vaccine was a real phenomenon, when really the vaccine sellers were just selling a made-up story about polio and polio paralysis. That REALLY just as many children as EVER continued to be paralyzed and either hobbling around on braces and crutches or confined to iron lungs. That the March of Dimes turned its efforts elsewhere when it was TOLD there was no more polio paralysis in the US, and all the tens of thousands of parents of crippled children every year were content with the story that it was just as it had always been, really GBS or maybe coxsackie virus.

Hospitals in the early '50s were overrun with polio patients during outbreaks, I read an account last night in The Polio Years in Texas of a child paralyzed who was put into a vast room filled with iron lungs and rocking beds (which forced air into and out of the lungs by their motion), where parents weren't allowed. She said that they were popping patients into and out of the iron lungs like cookies from the oven, as so many died very quickly. There was a map with numbers of polio outbreaks in the '40s and '50s by city. I was born in Beaumont, Texas, near Houston, and was surprised to learn that Houston had the highest number of outbreaks in all of Texas, eight of them. Probably because of the tropical climate? No wonder my parents were very glad to get me an excessive number even by the protocol of the time of polio vaccines.

So where is that still happening? If your narrative is correct, it's still happening, but no one knows about it. Are the tens of thousands of children still being crippled every year being hidden somewhere, maybe at the mythical institutions for the autistic of earlier days?

And please provide evidence that doctors in the '50s were ignorant enough to just diagnose any old paralysis as polio, no questions asked. In the numbers required to account for the huge numbers of polio victims.

This is a modern myth in certain circles, an a priori narrative to try to arrive at the desired conclusions: vaccines are always bad and never necessary, because no well-nourished person is ever in any danger from any contagious or infectious disease. And it is fallacious to take either narrative too far. My neighbor is 90: she remembers the polio years in the US, and thinks that because the polio vaccines ended polio in the US, that that means that all OTHER vaccines are equally safe and beneficial, and also necessary to wipe out serious contagious diseases. And her desire to believe in her worldview makes her patronizing toward me, my daughter, and our vaccine damage. But it is also patronizing and mistaken to say that polio was never a problem anyway and in nearly every case any paralysis caused was really caused by something else. I'd recommend Patenting the Sun and The Polio Years in Texas and consider the information and personal accounts in them before accepting without question the narrative seeking to dismiss or minimize the suffering from contagious or infectious disease so common up until recently. Or any of the many books written about it.

The narrative minimizing the ravages often caused by contagious disease depends on the society we inhabit in which nearly everyone has received numerous vaccines for the most dangerous contagious diseases, and so they rarely occur and most people are unfamiliar with them. It would be better to look at each disease and vaccine separately and evaluate the risks and possible benefits as well as the chances of its coming back here before making the vaccine decision. But not based on dogma.


Sorry about all these posts.
Have finally found the original primary source, in archives. ( God bless whoever scanned the whole Journal online!)

It takes a lot of work, but about half way through you can find the article ..


Hi Cia,
Did find a better source for Dr Greenberg, seems to be form the Illinois Health Journal

On page 88, he talks about the fact that prior to 1954, any doctor who reported polio in his patients was doing his patient a favor, as it subsidized the costs of hospitalization for the patient, and it was considered to be reporting a communicable disease.

So a kind doctor would likley have diagnosed anything with paralysis as potentially polio, if for no other reason than to help his patients get medical treatment.( there was no lab test required) Also interesting that hepatitis rates dropped with polio vaccination. Maybe improved hygiene and hand washing made more of a difference? He also talks about dodgy statistics of vaccinated and unvaccinated groups.
Very interesting reading, from someone on the ground during the time the diagnosis of "polio" changed..

cia parker

DDT usage was a very important factor in allowing the polio virus to go from the digestive tract to the nervous system and cause damage there. But it was not the only one. It worked in tandem with the polio virus itself. Five years ago, Dan and Mark did a report on another enterovirus which had crippled some children in California whose parents used pesticides on their raspberry crops. And the EV-68 virus which swept the country four years ago sickened tens of thousands, caused paralysis in about 120 (identified, at least), and about twelve deaths. With no DDT, but probably the influence of agricultural chemicals which permitted the enterovirus to penetrate to the neurological system in a way similar to polio. DDT wasn't the cause in itself, but was an enabling factor.

I have read in several places that there was an anatomical susceptibility to reacting to polio with paralysis. I'd like to know exactly what is meant by that, but it might mean a weak spot between the digestive and the neurological systems which could be perforated by the chemical to allow the passage of the polio virus. But surely it's like with autism itself: not everyone reacts to vaccines with autism: those who do have a usually genetic but sometime environmentally-determined susceptibility to reacting to a vaccine with excessive inflammation. And that means that it would be equally unfair to write off those vulnerable to polio paralysis as being biologically unfit.

Rachel Carson only alerted the world to the dangers of DDT when she published Silent Spring in about 1962 (I'd have to google it to make sure of the date). And it must also be remembered that DDT played a major role in eliminating malaria from the US. My father got malaria in Reserve, Louisiana (he could see the Mississippi from his upstairs bedroom window), in 1936. Draining the swamps also did a lot of good. At least as far as eradicating malaria, which EVERYONE in the South got before the public health measures to kill mosquitoes. Yellow fever was also rife in the South in the nineteenth century.

I read a book about malaria which concluded that it might be necessary to use DDT once again if malaria in Africa and Southeast Asia is to be controlled. But it conceded that there were advantages to just letting Nature establish its own balance, since there would continue to be many debilitating tropical diseases other than malaria, and there would continue to be no way to provide food, jobs, and other necessities for the massive numbers of people, who are and will continue to be malnourished and immunocompromised. If the greater good speaks against DDT and similar chemicals, what is to be done? (And I'm against DDT.) Malaria and yellow fever have largely been brought to heel by their use.


Just to follow up on the polio diagnosis requirements.
Found this on the website below.

According to Dr. Bernard Greenberg, head of the Department of Biostatistics of the University of North Carolina School of Public Health:

In order to qualify for classification as paralytic poliomyelitis, the patient had to exhibit paralytic symptoms for at least 60 days after the onset of the disease. Prior to 1954, the patient had to exhibit paralytic symptoms for only 24 hours. Laboratory confirmation and the presence of residual paralysis were not required. After 1954, residual paralysis was determined 10 to 20 days and again 50 to 70 days after the onset of the disease. This change in definition meant that in 1955 we started reporting a new disease, namely, paralytic poliomyelitis with a longer lasting paralysis.1

From this website

Will try and find the primary source for this.


Cia, I have what may? be multiple sclerosis., though am doing so much better now with thyroid meds and celiac diet.
The original criteria for a polio diagnosis; paralysis for 24 hours or more, is one I have already met. One fine morning,many years ago, ( long before being treated for hashimotos or celiac disease,) I woke up and couldn't walk. Family bless them got me to the doctors, was transferred to another medical center , and was eventually sent home after finally a nice doctor explained that with these neurological issues it can take years to get a proper diagnosis.
By the next day,i was doing better, ( did find out that much later that untreated hashimotos can very rarely result in temporary paralysis. never did find out for sure what happened or why.)
Had I gone to the hospital with those symptoms in the age of "all paralysis is polio" that is what they most likely would have diagnosed.
of course, I would not have met the new , post vaccine polio diagnosis requirements. ( was it 28 days of paralysis? not sure, must look it up again)


"As Dr. Rustein said in the article I linked, there are few infectious diseases other than polio which can cause paralysis, and in the cases in which polio was diagnosed, there were always symptoms of infectious disease."

Cia, In the 1950s all kinds of paralysis would have been diagnosed as Polio. The polio virus does not have the monopoly on paralysis or even polio-like paralysis.

Roosevelt was supposed to a polio case except that he wasn't. He had GBS.

We can't use the number of polio cases from 1950 to prove that the vaccine eliminated polio.

We don't have less paralysis today than we had in 1950.


Excellent article/Tutorial ,folk of all ages need to learn to think and speak "Flu-ent " Vaccination risk assessments for their own selfies!
Flu vaccines being sold as a magical panacea/ sterile bubble . One for all ,and many for all ages !
They can away and "Get Flu-ked " with it as no ongoing health and safety risk assessments done for the past 30 years ?
Push to get all NHS Highland staff to take flu vaccine /Press and Journal . 26 September 2018.
https/ /highlands.
Badges for staff indicating vaccination status ?
Remember they started with community status badges in the 1930s and 40s Europe before folk got sent to badges status ghettos!
What will the badges say? " I'm A Flu-nkie" or " I'm A Flu-ssie" " I'm Flu-ked " and I got a free badge ,a free pen and a free mug to do so and say so?
No risk assessments done, well sorry, but consent not available and "No means No "
NHS Trust, board room managers and medical officers are getting politely but directly informed to away and do a selfie ,for ,with and even too their own silly wee selfies ,with "CAP-IN-HAND" Badges handouts. in a very handicapped fashion, of behaviour modification.
A song for nurses wandering the NHS corridors with a loaded vaccination trolley in tow at NHS Tartan Ponderosa?
Three Wheels on My Wagon - Lee Marvin. Youtube

Jeannette Bishop

Just to chime in on the discussion of "polio" in the 1900s, I love sharing this Twitter thread to give an idea of factors that likely weigh in that are completely left out of the vaccine narrative:
(the thread numbers up through 59, you have to click on something like "28 more replies" to see all of it)

It sounds to me like 1952 was also approximately the year the public began turning against DDT usage (according to Marready there was suspicion that DDT was playing a role in a new sickness call Virus X, as well as in polio...this is from his book, The Moth in the Iron Lung), while at the same time they had increased DDT application because pests were becoming resistant, but before (this reminds me of Roundup, but it was probably worse) people were buying DDT impregnated wall-paper, spraying it around the home, directly onto children, military were instructed to spray it over themselves and all of their uniforms, theses types of personal applications, etc hoping to prevent polio among other things, so other than when wanting to remove dust, etc I doubt most people worried about washing DDT (or lead arsenate) off of foods or their hands before eating either.

cia parker


I was thinking about it while I was out with our dog. No one would mistake paralysis from MS (mercury poisoning) for polio. Permanent paralysis from MS doesn't often occur, when it does occurs many years into the course, and MS is nearly always diagnosed between thirty and fifty years of age. It is considered predictive of a bad outcome if it is diagnosed before the age of thirty or after the age of fifty. Permanent paralysis rarely occurs if none has happened by five years after diagnosis. I had my left arm and leg paralyzed in an attack of MS for about a month before they started to come back, but I had my parents bring some of my books on MS to the hospital and I thought that it had been six years since my diagnosis, so the paralysis wouldn't be permanent. Although the doctors thought it would be.

As Dr. Rustein said in the article I linked, there are few infectious diseases other than polio which can cause paralysis, and in the cases in which polio was diagnosed, there were always symptoms of infectious disease.

I think it has become popular, I guess it always has been, to hope for simple explanations and certain ways to ensure safety. I don't think it's truthful to say that all vaccines have always been unnecessary and/or ineffective in preventing disease, because well-nourished people will never be negatively affected by any contagious or infectious disease. I agree that all vaccines are dangerous, but if the disease feared reasonably seems to be MORE dangerous, based on the knowledge you have at the time, the vaccine might be the better option. Polio usually didn't kill, though sometimes it did, but it was truly horrifying the way that a previously healthy child could fall to the ground out of the blue, never to walk again. By the thousands. Unpredictably. Most people who got polio had no symptoms or completely recovered. But thousands were paralyzed for life. I had a roommate paralyzed by polio, several years after the vaccine had been available. Her parents had been afraid to get her the vaccine. She still lives in Kansas City now, but can no longer use crutches and braces the way she did then. She's in a wheelchair full-time. We shouldn't forget her nor any of the others who suffered so much, are still suffering, as a result of polio. And polio paralysis completely stopped happening within a few years of the introduction of the vaccine.

cia parker


In 1952 there was a very severe polio outbreak in the US: 57,628 cases diagnosed as polio, 3,145 dead, and 21,269 left with some degree of permanent paralysis. You would have to identify how many you thought were really paralyzed or killed by polio, and those which you think were caused by something else mistakenly identified as polio, and then identify a realistic number of cases caused by the other conditions which continued to occur after 1955, when polio could be positively diagnosed by lab test, and after 1960, when polio had been almost eradicated from the US by the vaccine. Were there still 21,269 (or 10,000, or whatever figure you want to assign to the other conditions) of mostly children paralyzed by something else which would formerly have been called polio in 1958, 1965, or now?

David Weiner

Cia Parker,

You stated: "But I think saying that we would have been better off if no vaccine had ever been developed is inhumane and disrespectful."

I am pretty sure that Dr. Wakefield is not saying this. I think that the point here is that, on the whole, the role that vaccines played in reducing mortality from infectious disease has been greatly overstated by the powers that be. And thus people think that we need to employ an arsenal of vaccines in order to keep this high mortality at bay. A fear of infectious disease may have been perfectly appropriate at times in the distant past. But today this fear is inculcated via propaganda and wreaks havoc with people's ability to make rational decisions.

And of course governments and industry are exploiting this fear by pressuring us into utilizing vaccines today which are not justified by the current conditions.

So the lies, distortions, and propaganda need to end so that people can assess risks in a rational manner and evaluate all of their options for protecting themselves. And if conditions develop in such a way so that utilizing a certain vaccine becomes an attractive option for some of the population, so be it. But judicious use can only work after the fearmongering has ended.

cia parker


But how many occurred under circumstances that in 1950 would have been diagnosed as polio?

"The total number of cases of polio reported each year includes both paralytic and nonparalytic forms of the disease. When polio occurs without paralysis, it may be difficult to diagnose, particularly in the absence of an epidemic. Nonparalytic polio has to be differentiated from infections due to other viruses, a distinction which medical advances have made possible only during the past few years. When such other virus infections are recognized in epidemic form, as occurred in Iowa in 1956, these cases are properly not included in the total annual figure for polio. Improvement in diagnosis has tended to decrease the number of reported cases of nonparalytic polio in recent years. This in turn makes comparisons of total cases in recent years with previous years less reliable.

Paralytic cases, however, are easily recognized, and paralysis only rarely occurs in other infectious diseases. Thus the total number of paralyzed cases is more reliable for year-to-year comparison. When the paralytic cases to December for 1955 and 1956 are compared, the decrease is much smaller than that of the total cases. There was a drop from 10,405 paralytic cases in 1955 to 6565 in 1956, a decrease of about one third, although there is a possible 5 to 10 per cent error here because of incomplete reports. Reliable records on numbers of paralytic cases for the United States are available for only the last two or three years, and they are, therefore, not precisely helpful at this time in interpreting the sharp decrease of this year. However, the seriousness of the paralytic disease and the reliability of reports on such cases will make this the best index for measuring the effect of polio vaccine in the future."


Hi Cia,
Here are statistics from the Reeves foundation about paralysis.

"According to the study, there are nearly 1 in 50 people living with paralysis – approximately 5.4 million people. That's the same number of people as the combined populations of Los Angeles, Philadelphia, and Washington D.C. And that number is nearly 40 percent higher than previous estimates showed."

That's an awful lot of people, who are currently paralyzed, compared to the 15 000 a year diagnosed with paralysis at the height of the polio epidemic.

They break down the stats; with multiple sclerosis it is 99,080 people paralyzed in the U.S. after you weed out spinal cord injury or stroke, multiple sclerosis and cerebral palsy, another 645, 940 Americans are paralyzed from "other " causes.

Per the study
5,357,970 people reported they were living with some form of paralysis, defined by the study as a central nervous system disorder resulting in difficulty or inability to move the upper or lower extremities.
Arthritis and Back injury were not included.
Just because we are not seeing it in the papers every day, doesn't mean people aren't paralyzed.
Of course acute flaccid myelitis (officially defined as " paralysis from unknown causes, but it sure couldn't be the vaccines the kids had in the last couple of weeks, even though provocation polio caused by injections has been known of since the time of the last polio epidemic, and even though guilliame barre / paralysis is a known side effect of the flu shot) is all over the news right now.
Interestingly, a return to usage of the flu mist vaccine seems to correlate with increased cases of acute flaccid myelitis in young children.....
With statistics and numbers like these, it is hard to convincingly argue that the only cause of paralysis in the USA right now is injuries or strokes.

cia parker

I'm having a hard time finding a chart with pertussis mortality by year. But I found: "During the period 1926–1930, there were 36,013 deaths from pertussis in the USA; the highest number occurred in young infants "

So that was the time shortly before the first pertussis vaccines began to be used in the US (many years before the combined DPT), what I would consider high mortality, and I think that, as with diphtheria, that the (dangerous) whole-cell vaccine DID prevent many deaths from pertussis. But the natural attenuation of the pathogen also played a part, probably a more important part that was obscured by the universal use of the vaccine, so that it was rarely dangerous after 1950. But natural attenuation doesn't always occur and I don't think it should be regarded as an inevitable occurrence. I would prefer to see large studies done on the efficacy of homeopathic prophylaxis, and, if they are as effective as I believe they are, then that would be the answer.

Rabies, as far as I know, has not been attenuated at all, and it is thanks to vaccines that we rarely hear about it occurring now. But I recognize that it is a dangerous vaccine, but rabies is always fatal when it occurs, as in the little boy in Orlando last year. Ebola seems to be in the process of being attenuated, down to maybe 50% mortality now, but if you lived over there, the vaccine might be a good option. Again, as far as I know, all the diseases in that group, yellow fever, Lassa fever, dengue fever, hemorrhagic dengue fever, chikungunya (a new one I recently learned about now relatively common in Mexico), are sometimes to often fatal.

I don't think it's a good idea to try to relegate vaccines to the trash heap of really bad ideas. First of all, as dangerous as they are, in cases like these the diseases (if you live in a hot zone) are MORE dangerous, and have been for a long time. Even if they become attenuated, it would be disrespectful to forget the terrible suffering, disability, and death the diseases have caused in the past, and still. Good nutrition, hygiene, etc., are great, but they're not panaceas. So saying that mortality from many diseases fell before the vaccines became universally used depends on establishing if vaccines were often used even before they were universally used, and whether unpredictable, uncontrollable, and unreliable natural attenuation did or will occur.

A lot of our current problem is from universally giving a huge number of vaccines, most of them not necessary. The MMR, hep-B (for those at low risk of infection or high risk behaviors), flu, HPV, chickenpox, rotavirus, hep-A, pneumococcal and meningococcal meningitis vaccines. But then I think that SOME people have been saved by the use of some of them, although more have been harmed. So it has to come back to well-informed choice. No guarantees either way. But I think saying that we would have been better off if no vaccine had ever been developed is inhumane and disrespectful.

cia parker

For the most part, I agree with this presentation, and certainly agree that most vaccines in developed countries now are doing more harm than good.

However, I don't think it was the case that disease incidence in the case of pertussis and diphtheria was plummeting before the vaccines for them were introduced. I think that at that time, the diseases were still universal and very deadly, and the vaccines did dramatically reduce mortality from them. The diphtheria antitoxin was introduced in the US in the 1890s, and, if it were given very soon after exposure, it usually prevented death from diphtheria. The more days that passed, the less effective it was. The vaccine was developed in the US in the 1920s and immediately started reducing mortality when it was given. The highest recorded incidence of diphtheria in the US (it was higher before the twentieth century), was in 1921: 206,939 cases, with 15,520 deaths. The vaccine, when it was given, immediately started preventing those deaths. Not to say that it wasn't a dangerous vaccine: it was, but for most it was an acceptable trade-off. More lives were saved than lost.

Diphtheria vaccination campaigns became common in the 1930s. The book The Age of Autism, p. 180 et seq., describes one of Kanner's first autistic cohort, David Speck, born in the summer of 1932. His mother, Miriam Partridge Speck, went to Baltimore to live there with him a few weeks after he was born.

"She returned to a city that was in full battle mode against diphtheria. The war had begun in 1931, with a drive to immunize the city's children by six months of age. This coincided with the rise of the diphtheria toxoid vaccine outlined in chapter 5, a new treatment that was an improvement on the toxin-antitoxin formulation because it was more effective, caused fewer obvious reactions and required only two shots, not three (the use of aluminum as an adjuvant reduced that to one shot by the mid-1930s - a public health officer's dream).

The city's residents were bombarded. 'In January 1932, the Commmissioner of Health sent a circular to the city's private physicians that included a diphtheria inoculation certificate to be given to parents,' stated the city health department's annual report. The same month, a six-month greeting card program was inaugurated. The purpose of the card was to call attention to the fact that 'six months is the best age for the child to receive from a physician toxoid inoculations for the prevention of diphtheria.'

The campaign was stepped up the following year. 'In terms of children given two successive doses of toxoid the 1933 campaign was eminently successful,' the health department reported. By the end of 1933, health officials estimated that 31.3% of children under five had received the required inoculations, up from 24.1% at the close of 1932. The 1933 campaign featured a minut-and-a-half film (called a 'toxoid talkie trailer') shown in 31 movie theaters in metropolitan Baltimore in the first half of May. Officials estimated that half the population saw the film.

Did this campaign reach Miriam Speck and her infant son David? That seems likely; when she returned to Baltimore, she began studying psychology at Hopkins, which was in the middle of its drive to vaccinate every child. Just as the campaign was getting under way, the Eastern Health District of Baltimore was established in 1932 as a oint project of the city health department and Johns Hopkins. It operated very much along the lines of the well-baby clinic at Harvard, as doctors and nurses sought to promote health and prevent infectious illness through routine screenings, better sanitation and diet, and vaccination."

So probably David Speck got the diphtheria vaccine as an infant and the mercury in it caused his autism, as it did in the other eleven of Kanner's first autistic cohort, whether from the diphtheria vaccine or from its use in fungicides which some of the children had been exposed to. But these events occurred many years before the DPT was introduced in the US in 1948, and in the UK around ten years later. All three of the vaccines in it had been used since they were developed decades before. Not as universally as after the DPT, but often widely nonetheless. My mother got the diphtheria vaccine in 1933, when she was four, and it caused Asperger's and permanent chronic bowel disease for the rest of her life.

However, it DID eventually almost eliminate diphtheria, which had been a horrendous and very common child killer before the vaccine. Wendy Lydall in her excellent book Raising a Vaccine-Free Child, gives official UK mortality charts on the major childhood killer diseases. Diphtheria deaths peaked there in 1900, with 9,000 deaths from diphtheria there that year. Her chart shows the diphtheria vaccine being introduced in the UK in 1940, when there were about 2,500 deaths, and then they plummeted quickly to close to zero. It WAS declining before the vaccine, but it is still true that, as in the US, the vaccine saved thousands of lives.

The history of pertussis and its vaccine is similar. The peak number of recorded cases in the US was 265,269 cases in 1934. I'll have to see how many deaths there were from it that year, but in the nineteenth century it had been a major child killer both in the US and the UK. Wendy's chart for pertussis shows that there were 18,000 deaths from pertussis in 1885. The first pertussis vaccine was developed in the US in 1914, but was not widely used. Drs. Leila Denmak (sp?), Pearl Kendrick, and Grace Eldeng developed the whole-cell vaccine in the 1930s, and, as with the diphtheria vaccine, it began to be widely used, but not universally so until the DPT. As well, pertussis at this time evolved to become a much less virulent disease, until by 1950 it rarely caused death when it occurred. Measles underwent the same process, being transformed from a dangerous, often fatal, disease in the nineteenth century, to a relatively mild, universal childhood disease by 1950. And after the DPT, pertussis became rare.

But I think it should be borne in mind that once pertussis and measles had evolved, the vaccine was no longer a good idea for healthy children, and immunocompromised ones would require another discussion. But, despite inaugurating the Age of Autism, I think the diphtheria vaccine saved more lives than it took, and it definitely can take credit for ending the Age of Diphtheria. Which, as we have discussed, came back in the former Soviet Union in the late '80s and early '90s, and caused thousands of deaths. Tetanus is not a contagious disease, but it also would require another discussion, as would the infectious and sometimes mildly contagious Hib meningitis. And polio. I'm rereading Patenting the Sun. I'm giving a friend Dr. Moskowitz' Vaccines and Patenting the Sun as a birthday present, to show the bad side of vaccines and their good side when used reasonably. As Dan Olmsted said a few years ago, it's not truthful to say that most cases of what was diagnosed as polio were really something else. Once it caused paralysis, there were very few possibilities other than polio. Those who say that most of them were really aseptic meningitis, coxsackie disease, Guillain-Barre syndrome, etc., would have to explain why the cases and the paralysis (in a minority of cases) came in epidemic waves, and why, if polio were not the cause, paralysis from these other assumed causes did not continue in numbers unassociated with those for polio. The thousands of cases a year of paralysis stopped with the widespread use of the polio vaccine.

I totally agree that better nutrition, hygiene, sanitation, and uncrowded living conditions caused most of the decrease in contagious disease, but that they do not prevent transmission of airborne contagious diseases. And the decline in virulence (survival of the fittest for microbes) in measles and pertussis caused the reduction in deaths from these diseases, which remained universal or very common until the vaccines. (A very bad thing in the case of beneficial measles and to some extent pertussis.)

David Weiner

JB Handley's blog covers a mortality study done in 1977 (by McKinlay and McKinlay) which analyzed what factors accounted for the 74% decrease in mortality rates during the 20th century in the U.S.

They determined that, at most, all medical interventions accounted for 3.5% of the decrease. When you consider that antibiotics and surgical advances likely did save some people, then the contribution from vaccines would be even lower.

When you consider that the DTP has been shown to markedly increase overall mortality in Africa, and that vaccines can kill directly, it would not surprise me in the least if vaccines have been responsible for an increase in the overall mortality rate.

Paul Thomas

This is simple, clear, and should be essential material for anyone who is trying to understand the role of vaccines (or lack of role) in preventing disease.


Not to mention that all of the diseases are still with us but their names have been changed.

Hans Litten

Another question for the future is, will vaccines be the cause of a dramatic fall in life expectancies ?

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been saved. Comments are moderated and will not appear until approved by the author. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until the author has approved them.

Your Information

(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)