From The Anti-Vivisection Journal.
FOR those of us who like reading the signs, it would appear that the beginning of the abandonment of serum treatment is on the horizon. Serum treatment undoubtedly contains within itself the germs of its own destruction. It took more than a hundred years of vaccination for its champions to discover and admit the complication of postvaccinal encephalitis. It may take many years yet before orthodox science discovers fully all the evils this practice alone may confer.
We are convinced that encephalitis is not new complaint arising suddenly through some inexplicable mutation of the vaccine virus; that similar cases must have occurred throughout the history of vaccination, but that for reasons easy to imagine, cause and effect were not collated. We are equally convinced that present-day medicine has not the capacity for estimating in full the damage done to the individual by vaccination, but that when it does so, the future generations will hold up their hands in horror at the astonishing stupidity of doctors (the word means learned persons) in ignoring the possibilities of injury in this practice.
The source of the downfall of all practice in which substances derived from other creatures are injected direct into the tissues or blood stream of the human subject will be the question of blood sensitization in which we may included anaphylaxis and allergy. Gross ignorance and utter lack of imagination have permitted these monstrously unscientific practices to go on for so long. In our opinion the introduction of sera from animals into human tissues is a practice fraught with incalculable perils both to the individual and to the race.
It is largely owing to enquiries in connection with blood sensitization, food allergy and anaphylactic shock that at long last even the orthodox are beginning to hesitate. Bound up, we believe, indirectly with these things are the presence of food allergies, blood transfusion fatalities and a host of disease symptoms. Not only is the blood of humanity becoming perhaps irretrievably contaminated, with resultant degeneration, but also the blood and tissues of domestic animals are being polluted in the same way with similar results to them and with added effects upon those human beings who resort to them for their nutriment.
We cannot hazard an opinion as to whether this damage which is at present loudly crescendo, can ever be finally undone. We fear that many generations must succeed each other before the evils can finally be outgrown. Whether indeed our wonderful men of science will be able to stop before it is too late we cannot prophesy, and yet we do see signs of impending enlightenment in dark places.
It is unfortunate that so completely has the laboratory established itself in the minds of scientific people that they look to it for the final verdict upon any scientific subject. We must insist that with regard to questions of health and disease, with questions relating to vital functions, especially of human beings, the laboratory is totally incapable of delivering any final verdict whatsoever.
The immense scrap heaps of effete scientific knowledge which obtrude themselves whenever we take a look backward into the origins and evolution of modern medical science are sufficient evidence of the justice of this assertion. the overweening conceit of the laboratory worker with his latest researches, disproved or out of date almost before they appear in print, should be a warning against his judgment.
Whilst we, as humanitarians, have protested against so much of this work and have condemned it out of its methods, out of the profound conviction that only right ways can produce right results, at the same time the researchers themselves have been accumulating evidence which is forcing them to concur with views which our basic standpoint has made us adopt. Let us suggest another slogan to be added to those already current: “Trust the humanitarian”.
These observations have been prompted by articles on milk intolerance, blood transfusion fatalities and diphtheria immunization which have appeared in recent medical journals.
A later from Dr. Foley in the British Medical journal of December 12th provides interesting evidence.
An article appeared in the issue of November 28th, comparing the results of immunization by the one shot method using alum precipitated toxoid (A.P.T.) and the three shot method using toxin-anti-toxin floccules (T.A.F.) or toxoid-toxin mixture (T.A.M.). The conclusion of the authors was that the results of immunizing by the one shot method was much less certain than the three successive injections of the other-also: “severe diphtheria is possible after either method of immunization”.
Dr. Foley in commenting on this article makes the following statement regarding the three shot method:. “First the children belong to the parents. Secondly, the response to an injected foreign protein is of four kinds: (I) no response; (20 anaphylactic conditions, which occasionally means convulsions or collapse; (3) a thermal reaction; and, later 94) serum sickness. Anaphylaxis is a state of hypersensitiveness to the action of a foreign protein brought about by the previous introduction of that protein.
Where the anaphylactic shock occurs after the first of the proposed three injections, or where even the thermal reaction with its associated headache and prostration comes on a few minutes after the injection the parents will not have the child again injected and that does for the three shot method.
In other words, you had better use the one shot method by which the parents are prevented from reacting before treatment is complete, and get less perfect results, than use the “better” method and get only 50 per cent. of the children completing the course. (Dr. Foley says that out of 135 only about 60 finished the course).
He then passes on to observe that anaphylactic shock is becoming more and more common because of the habit doctors have of dosing diphtheria contacts with 500 or 1,000 units of anti-toxin as an immediate safeguard against catching diphtheria.
He also observes that:.
“In these days of motor versus horse transport the reaction to serum treatment of town-bred children gives no guidance to that of rural dwellers, particularly those in the agricultural industry or in contact with the house population-in fact, I consider that 10 minims solution of adrenaline should be given before any serum injection, especially to children of an asthmatic parent, or those in close association with horses, as in a agricultural area”.
If your can visualize the contamination and sensitization which is going on throughout the community in the form of smallpox vaccination, diphtheria immunization, tuberculin injection, all forms of serum injection, injections of glandular extracts from pigs, cows, sheep and horses, you can form idea of the cumulative damage it is suffering from. This is without reference to the failure of these methods to effect their aims.
If indeed it is a general practice for doctors to immunize with anti-toxin direct contacts and if at the same time large scale A.P.T. or T.A.M. or T.A.F. immunization is being carried out, we cannot but express astonishment at the great amount of diphtheria which defies all these efforts at control.
