The exploiters of artificial immunity take very good care to see that the wind is just right when enter the field-an easy job because they make it themselves, like the mechanics behind the scenes in the movie-studio, who turn on a tornado to order, when the picture requires it. Both are fakes, but they make a tremendous impression upon the ever-gullible public.


For many years past immunity and toleration have been perennial headliners in medicine. They have been subjects of an immense amount of research, discussion and publicity, all of which have been capitalized, commercialized and made the foundation of a system and an industry which has greatly enriched the manufacturers of drugs, serums and vaccines, and all who are connected with them.

Medical men-and their name is Legion-who are tied to the leading strings of the manufacturers and dominated by the organizations of “official medicine” have also profited by this exploitation. Many of these men know the falsity of the claims made for the system, but are too mercenary or too cowardly to oppose it. They are wilfully blind to its evil results.

Others, probably the majority, in common with the public, have never given the subject serious thought or investigation, but have simply swallowed the whole outfit, bait, hook, line and sinker. These are ignorantly but hardly the less culpably blind, to the evil results of the system.

The ranks of the gullible seem never to diminish.

“Whats in a name? That which we call a rose,.

By any other name would smell as sweet”.

So would a skunk; but there the parallel ends. A rose is beautiful and modest. Its delicate fragrance is scarcely perceptible a few feet away; but one can smell a skunk forty rods away and further, if the wind is right.

The exploiters of artificial immunity take very good care to see that the wind is just right when enter the field-an easy job because they make it themselves, like the mechanics behind the scenes in the movie-studio, who turn on a tornado to order, when the picture requires it. Both are fakes, but they make a tremendous impression upon the ever-gullible public.

P.T. Barnums famous dictum still holds true.

Narrowly viewed, artificial immunity as a product of serology, is not a rose. It is not modest, it is not esthetic and it smells to heaven. It contains almost infinite potentialities for ultimate biological degradation. But of that, nobody seems to be aware. No-body seems to be observing or investigating the kind, character or extent of the organic and physical changes which take place after the introduction of these protein poisons into the living organism. The medical profession has occasionally been sharply reminded of their dangerous qualities, as displayed in anaphylaxis; but after the first shock of surprise, they have merely modified their technical procedures slightly and continued as before.

FEW appear to see the immense biological significance of these phenomena. It foes not occur to the exploiters that substances which are so deadly in exceptional cases, must be more or less dangerous in all cases; that danger is a matter of susceptibility and degrees, varying for individuals according to time and circumstances, but always present.

Coming back to the subject of names, which I had in mind when I began this rambling discourse. The substitution of a new name for an old one sometimes makes a wonderful difference in the way a subject is regarded. It makes it possible, for instance, for discredited medical exploiters to resurrect an exploded theory, furbish up their processes and start a new campaign of specious propaganda, by which they may succeed in rehabilitating their tottering institutions, regain their rapidly disappearing power and prestige and replenish their treasuries. But at the same time, it affords a new and enlightening point of view for those who have previously given the subject little or no thought. Serological immunity is a case in point.

The little of this paper is “lifted bodily from a recent newspaper article in the New York Evening Graphic by Herbert M. Shelton, a popular writer on health topics, who is gifted with more than the usual degree of penetration into the medical shams of the day and is not afraid to say what he thinks. He has put the case against artificial immunity so clearly and so forcibly, that I quote him verbatim:.


“Medical men talk a lot about immunity. They talk glibly about establishing artificial immunity. They talk learnedly about acquiring immunity by coming in contact with germs and by having mild cases of disease. For the most part their talk is only super-heated air and they do not understand what they say themselves.

“They have never realized that this thing they call immunity is the same thing that is known as toleration. Immunity to a cause of disease in the medical sense, is identical with the thing called toleration, when applied to the bodys ability to take opium or tobacco or arsenic or heroin, etc., without producing symptoms of acute poisoning.

“they know that the use of these drugs, even though the body does learn to tolerate them, ultimately wrecks the body. They know that the opium addict can take enough of the drug at one time to kill outright several non-users, and it only produces an apparent well-being in the addict. But they know the final result of opium addiction. The opium kills. Tolerated poisons bring death. The repeated or habitual use of anything that is harmful in itself, will not render its use salutary.

“They do not realize that their so-called immunity leads to death as certain as toleration; that when the body learns to tolerate any cause for disease (acquires immunity) it takes into its vitals the cause of its ultimate destruction. If there was no toleration, there would be no death except from violence”.

What an infinite amount of twaddle, of lying, of misinterpretation and misrepresentation, of juggling and forging statistics, of bamboozling, hoodwinking, intimidating and coercing the public, of lobbying and wire pulling in legislative bodies, has been perpetrated in establishing and maintaining vaccination, the grand-daddy of modern serology! And what a horrible aftermath of chronic disease, physical degeneration and death!.

If anyone doubts or does not know this, let him go to nearest great medical library and spend a few hours in scanning the voluminous Report of the British Royal Commission, which investigated vaccination for eight years and brought about the abolition of compulsory vaccination in Great Britain.

And while he is in the investigating mood let him call for Crookshanks classical work on The History and Pathology of Vaccination, and devote an hour or two to that, regaling his eyes on the horrible but magnificent colored plates and illustrations, portraying the ravages magnificent colored plates and illustrations, portraying the ravages of vaccination and its complications.

If mistake not, he will go home a humbler, wiser, disillusioned man, as he reflects upon the blindness, obstinacy and perversity of the “learned” profession of which he is a member.

The medical as well as the general public clamors today for they speedy, the spectacular and the startling. It is as willing to pay its good money to the medical men and the drug merchants for temporary, quick relief from its suffering, as it is to pay the movie magnates for an hours specious relief from the deadly dullness of its sordid life, unaware that the relief afforded, is equally fictitious and deceptive in both cases. It wants immunity from the consequences of its lawlessness without ceasing to be lawless. It demands that the doctor, who has shown the way, shall now become particeps criminis with it.

Last Sunday a taxicab driver dashed up my steps, rang the doorbell long and violently and informed me that he had been sent to rush me to the bedside of a woman living two blocks away, who had a “heart attack.” My protest that I was not in general practice and did not respond to transient calls, made no impression upon him. He had been sent to get me and that was all there was to it. It was only around the corner and I must come. No, he did not know the ladys name, but of course she knew me, or she would not have sent for me.

Somewhat mystified, but always willing to be of service to a lady in distress, especially on Sunday, I allowed my gallantry to prevail over my policy, stepped into the taxicab and was whisked around the corner on two wheels. The ladys husband met me at the door, shook hands with me, mentioned his name and conducted me into his wifes room. Both were strangers to me.

The lady, “far, fat and forty,” in handsome street attire, was lying on the bed. She greeted me with a smile a polite phrase, the while her husband moved quickly about the room, disposing of my hat and coat. He then stationed himself beside a table upon which was neatly laid out a bowl of hot water, a clean towel, a couple of glasses and a little case containing a half dozen ampoules of a proprietary preparation of digitalis.

They were all ready for the “hypodermic” and awaiting my immediate use of the needle, with an air of perfect assurance. No explanation, no questions, and none expected from me. Evidently they assumed and believed that the message and ready-made diagnosis of a “heart attack” communicated by a taxicab driver was all that would be required by any experienced physician.

Stuart Close
Stuart M. Close (1860-1929)
Dr. Close was born November 24, 1860 and came to study homeopathy after the death of his father in 1879. His mother remarried a homoeopathic physician who turned Close's interests from law to medicine.

His stepfather helped him study the Organon and he attended medical school in California for two years. Finishing his studies at New York Homeopathic College he graduated in 1885. Completing his homeopathic education. Close preceptored with B. Fincke and P. P. Wells.

Setting up practice in Brooklyn, Dr. Close went on to found the Brooklyn Homoeopathic Union in 1897. This group devoted itself to the study of pure Hahnemannian homeopathy.

In 1905 Dr. Close was elected president of the International Hahnemannian Association. He was also the editor of the Department of Homeopathic Philosophy for the Homeopathic Recorder. Dr. Close taught homeopathic philosophy at New York Homeopathic Medical College from 1909-1913.

Dr. Close's lectures at New York Homeopathic were first published in the Homeopathic Recorder and later formed the basis for his masterpiece on homeopathic philosophy, The Genius of Homeopathy.

Dr. Close passed away on June 26, 1929 after a full and productive career in homeopathy.