In the discussions on Covid vaccines, it is often argued that vaccines eradicated smallpox, polio and other infections and, therefore, to oppose them is “unscientific”. I want to address this argument because I do not believe it to be true. There is a counter narrative that it was sanitation that caused the eradication of diseases such as smallpox and polio. I believe this counter narrative for several reasons. First, statements from pro-vaccine sources that are intended to defend the vaccine narrative. Second, statements by medical professionals past and present. Third, the Biblical teaching on sanitation and hygiene. And fourth, good old fashioned common sense. It is my hope that you, the reader, will be prompted to think and do your own research on this matter.
It is very easy for someone to make the claim that vaccines are the best contribution to modern medicine and that they have cured so many diseases. It is easy to say “trust the experts.” This is convenient because it means that you do not have to do your own research or think for yourself. Vaccine mythology caters to convenience and laziness in another way: Maintaining good health would involve minimal effort. Wouldn’t it be great to have a vaccine where you can just carry on binging on junk food and getting drunk! Just get jabbed now and again and let the vaccine do the hard work for you. I was tempted when I saw adverts for weight loss pills but then remembered the saying “if something seems too good to be true then it probably is”. I also remember the irony of seeing a news article where a woman contracted Covid 19 and angrily lashed out “I blame the unvaccinated for this.” She conveniently overlooked the fact that she was obese and not looked after her own health. Today we are rightly told that good diet, exercise, hygiene and cleanliness are key to prevention and recovery of diseases.
Medical Experts and Researchers from the Past
Dr. Walter Hawden summed up the different views in 1896::
The medical profession of to-day is divided into two great sections. On the one hand we have a section, who form, I am bound to say, the majority, who believe that the only remedy for smallpox is vaccination with all its risks. On the other hand there is another section, the minority to which I have the honour to belong, which believes that the remedy for small-pox is not vaccination but sanitation—(cheers)—which is accompanied by no risk at all. We protest against the diseasing of children by Act of Parliament. We say that small-pox is a filth disease, and that if we get rid of the filth we shall get rid of the disease. We also declare that when a person is ill the doctor is justified in doing all he possibly can for his patient; but when a person is well he has no right whatever to interfere with the normal functions of the human body as he does when he introduces disease, especially the disease of an inferior animal, unless he can give a distinct and absolute guarantee, not only that the operation will effect the purpose avowed, but also that it will produce no injurious results.Walter Hawden J.P., M.D., L.R.C.P., M.R.C.S., L.S.A, The Case Against Vaccination. Source.
I have emphasised the key point in the above. If small-pox is a filth disease then one must get rid of the filth. You must get rid of the cause in order to make a cure. This is simple logic and common sense. Hawden later states:
The period in which he [Jenner] lived was undoubtedly a very filthy period. It was a time when, to take London for instance, the streets were nothing but a mass of cobble stones, the roads were so narrow that the people could almost shake hands across the street, and as for fresh air they scarcely knew anything about it, for locomotion such as we have to-day was unknown. Sanitary arrangements were altogether absent. They obtained their water from conduits and wells in the neighbourhood, Water closets there were none, and no drainage system existed. It was in London especially that small-pox abounded, where bodies were buried in Old St. Paul’s Churchyard in Covent Garden only a foot below the soil, and people had to get up in the middle of the night and burn frankincense to keep off the stench; and where those who could afford it had houses on each side of the Fleet river, so that when the wind blew towards the east they lived in the west, and when it blew towards the west they lived in the east. This was the condition of old London, and you cannot be surprised if small-pox was then what Dr. Bond calls a scourge; you cannot be surprised if small-pox has declined since, even after this wonderful discovery of vaccination—(laughter and cheers)—and let us not forget that sanitary improvements began in London as early as 1766, and small-pox began to decline as a consequence before vaccination was invented.Ibid
This doctor observed that small-pox began to decline before the invention of vaccination.
In reference to small-pox (along with measles, whooping-cough, yellow fever, typhus, scarlet fever and diphtheria, and cholera) social critic Alfred Wallace said in 1898:
The conditions which especially favour these diseases are foul air and water, decaying organic matter, overcrowding, and other unwholesome surroundings, whence they have been termed “filth diseases.” The most terrible and fatal of these—the plague—prevails only where people live under the very worst sanitary conditions as regards ventilation, water supply, and general cleanliness. Till about 250 years ago it was as common in England as small-pox has been during the present century, but a very partial and limited advance in healthy conditions of life entirely abolished it, its place being to some extent taken by small-pox, cholera, and fevers. The exact mode by which all these diseases spread is not known; cholera, typhus, and enteric fever are believed to be communicated through the dejecta from the patient contaminating drinking water. The other diseases are spread either by bodily contact or by transmission of germs through the air; but with all of them there must be conditions favouring their reception and increase. Not only are many persons apparently insusceptible through life to some of these diseases, but all the evidence goes to show that, if the whole population of a country lived under thoroughly healthy conditions as regards pure air, pure water, and wholesome food, none of them could ever obtain a footing, and they would die out as completely as the plague and leprosy have died out, though both were once so prevalent in England.1Alfred Wallace, LL.D. DUBL., D.C.L. OXON., F.R.S., ETC.
Vaccination a Delusion, Chapter 1. Source
Smallpox: Pro-Vax Official Sources
The role of sanitation to prevent infection is admitted and acknowledged by pro-vaccine sources and official health organisations. The BBC reports:
The Industrial Revolution, which led to the mass movement of people from rural living to towns, also brought with it the need for sanitation.
At first the link between crowded living conditions and illness went unrecognised and infectious diseases exacted a huge toll of illness and death.
Tuberculosis, dysentery, diphtheria, typhoid, measles, smallpox and intestinal diseases were all rife.BBC News 5th January 2007
The World Health Organization and the European Centre for Disease Control concur. Whilst not specifically mentioning small-pox, the same principle applies:
Poor sanitation is linked to transmission of diseases such as cholera, diarrhoea, dysentery, hepatitis A, typhoid and polio and exacerbates stunting.
Poor sanitation reduces human well-being, social and economic development due to impacts such as anxiety, risk of sexual assault, and lost educational opportunities.World Health Organization, Sanitation
Provision of clean water, improved hygienic practices and sanitation are important for reducing the risk of transmission in endemic countries.European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control
Person-to-person spread of poliovirus occurs via the fecal-oral or oral-oral routes. The fecal-oral route is the most important transmission pathway in settings with suboptimal hygiene and sanitation.CDC, Poliomyeletis
From this data, it is widely acknowledged by pro-vaccine advocates that sanitation is the means to prevent infection. If poor sanitation is the cause of a disease then it logically follows that good sanitation is cure. This would lend support to the narrative that it was improved sanitation that eradicated smallpox and other infections. I find it very hard to believe that a vaccine would have eradicated the disease while they continued living in filth.
Polio and Double-Speak
Like smallpox, the lack of sanitation was a factor in spreading polio. The US National Library of Medicine informs us:
The poliovirus enters the body through the mouth, multiplies in the oropharynx and the small intestine and exits in the feces from which it can spread rapidly through a community, especially in areas with poor hygiene and sanitation…
Before the twentieth century, poor hygiene and sanitation meant that almost all children were exposed to poliovirus during infancy, which enabled natural immunity to build up in populations. The industrial revolution brought great sanitary improvements, including the separation of sewage from drinking waterGemma Lien corresponding author and David L. Heymann, The Problem with Polio: Toward Eradication, Dec 2013, PMCID: PMC4108111
Given these great sanitary improvements, one would expect polio to disappear. However it increased after vaccination was introduced. This is embarrassing for pro-vaxxers so they blame sanitation for the increase. The above authors continue:
While this proved vital in increasing public health standards in general, it initially had disastrous effects in relation to polio cases. It reduced childhood exposure to the virus and lowered immunity levels in communities, creating the perfect setting for epidemics to ignite.
This is absurd. It implies that sanitation is a bad thing! It also implies that we all need to live in filth in order to develop our immune systems. It also contradicts their previous statement that “poor hygiene and sanitation meant that almost all children were exposed to poliovirus”. Then they do another U-turn and blame the lack of sanitation for polio in India:
India’s greatest challenge to eradication was the sub-optimal effectiveness of tOPV [oral polio vaccine] in areas of high birth rates, poor sanitation as well as dense and migratory communities.
So according this narrative, sanitation prevents polio in one place but spreads it in another. In Western civilisations, sanitation was bad because it caused polio. In India, sanitation is good and it is needed to prevent polio. When cases rise, sanitation is to blame. When cases fall, vaccination takes the credit. It shows the dishonest and ridiculous lengths pro-vaccine supporters will go to in order to defend their narrative. The above quote also implies that the vaccine is ineffective without sanitation. They say “the sub-optimal effectiveness of tOPV [oral polio vaccine] in areas of high birth rates, poor sanitation.” In other words, the vaccine can only eradicate the disease where there is cleanliness. Is this not evidence that sanitation (and not vaccination) was the real cure?
The authors are not alone in this silly view. The CDC concur that it was sanitation that caused a subsequent increase in polio:
In the immediate prevaccine era, during the first half of the 20th century, improved sanitation resulted in less frequent exposure and increased the age of primary infection, resulting in large epidemics with high numbers of deaths.CDC Website, Poliomyelitis.
Like the previous authors, this implies that sanitation is a bad thing and it implies that we all need to live in dirt and filth. Again, it completely contradicts the official statements that sanitation is important for reducing the risk of transmission. Remember that they have said elsewhere that “suboptimal sanitation” is “the most important transmission pathway” for infection. According to the CDC, sanitation is good in some places but bad in other places. Again, they swing it whichever way it favours the vaccine narrative.
The magazine Inside Science provides some background on this situation:
Scientists noted that up until the 20th century, polio was hardly a major public health risk, and paralytic polio was “fairly rare,” Martinez-Bakker said. From 1900 on, however, cases exploded. By 1950, there were 35,000 cases in the U.S. annually. The fact that the increase coincided with the industrialization of the western world and improvements in sanitation and hygiene led scientists to develop what is known as the hygiene hypothesis.Inside Science, Complicated Twists in the Fight to Eradicate Polio
It is unclear whether Inside Science support the hygiene hypthesis. To be fair to them, they appear to be just describing it for information.
Improvements in sanitation reduced transmission of the virus, so most people were no longer infected as children and were no longer immune when they caught the disease later in life, according to the theory.
But there is a logical problem with this “scientific” hypothesis. If sanitation reduced the transmission of the virus then it could not simultaneously increase it. That is double-speak. I do not buy the idea that their immunity is weakened in adult life but let us grant this for the sake of argument. If sanitation had prevented it from gaining a footing how would they get it later in life? If the immune system did not need to respond then it does not matter if it was not able to do so.
The CDC have already admitted that sanitation prevents disease. Obviously, deficiency in the the immune could not have caused the increase in itself. The immune system only responds to something else attacking the body. Filth and dirt can be eliminated because both sides agree that people were living in cleaner conditions. What these authors have omitted is that the increase actually coincided with the introduction of vaccination.
More Doctors Speak Up
Unless someone can suggest other possible factors, I would concur with Dr. Vernon Coleman that it was the vaccines themselves that caused the increase:
The polio vaccine did not ‘kill off’ polio. On the contrary, the vaccine resulted in more sufferers. In Tennessee, in the US, the number of polio victims before vaccination became compulsory was 119. The year after vaccination was introduced, the figure rose to 386. Similar figures for other American states. Polio became less common as a result of better sanitation and cleaner water supplies. The vaccination had no useful effect.20 Facts About Vaccination that Your Doctor forgot to Tell You.
Dr. Coleman is a retired GP who resigned his practice because he had a conscience. He cared for his patients and went against pressure from his management to get financial rewards and statistical success. Quotes like this demonstrate why Coleman is smeared and censored by the mainstream media. They have done their job well because many of my contacts will not give him a fair hearing. I sent one of his videos to several contacts alerting us to the adverse reactions to the Covid vaccines and they all rejected it. They responded “I’ve Googled Vernon Coleman and he is a conspiracy theorist.” They mocked, scorned, refused to listen, refused to think and refused to do their own research. They believed what the Google had told them, they closed the conversation down and they took the injection.
Doctor Suzanne Humphries is another doctor smeared by the mainstream. She states:
Doctors today are given extensive training on how to talk to “hesitant” parents – how to frighten them by vastly inflating the risks during natural infection. They are trained on the necessity of twisting parents’ arms to conform, or fire them from their practices. Doctors are trained that NOTHING bad should be said about any vaccine, period. Historically it has been commonplace, since the times of the deadly smallpox vaccines – to discourage or silence scholarly, thoughtful and cautious opposition to mass vaccination policies. This is politics, plain and simple, in the environment of cronyism and corporatism that has invaded the supposed health-care industry.Smoke, Mirrors and the Disappearance of Polio
Like Coleman, Humphries is speaking out against the “corporatism” that has invaded the health care industry. She has risked her professional reputation to do so.
The Bible, History and Common Sense
In addition to the above information, I also want to appeal to the Bible, history and good old fashioned common sense. Whilst these three factors do not prove the counter-narrative on sanitation and hygiene, they lead me to trust it. The Bible advocates hand-washing in the Levitical codes and this is a widely accepted medical practice today. It is also well known that the Jewish community were far less impacted by the Black Plague because they followed these Biblical practices. Due to ignorance, many anti-Semites wrongly concluded that it was the Jewish people causing the plague but that is another subject for another time.
The website Tomorrow’s World very aptly comments:
The biblical laws of sanitation were clearly ahead of their time! There was really no way to fully understand the reasons for these laws until the invention of the microscope, the discovery of bacteria and the pioneering work of pathologists in recent centuries, yet these ancient biblical laws have proven scientifically valid today!
Contaminated garments were to be washed or burned—important sanitizing principles that are still followed today. Dwellings that showed signs of mold, or that had harbored sick individuals, were to be cleaned, repaired or destroyed, to prevent the spread of disease (see Leviticus 13–15)…People showing signs of sickness were to be isolated—quarantined—until examined by a priest and declared well.
In Deuteronomy 23:9–14, we learn that human wastes were to be buried, away from human dwellings. Today we call this sanitary waste disposal, and its benefits are widely understood but not always practiced—especially in poverty-stricken areas. History is filled with epidemics of typhus, cholera and dysentery, linked to the careless dumping of human waste into streets and rivers, or feeding human waste to animals that are then eaten. Burying human waste breaks the life cycle of many parasitic organisms that spread disease. This simple practice is much more effective, and less expensive, than treating disease after it breaks out—and God put this principle in the Bible thousands of years before mankind’s science understood its benefit!Tomorrow’s World, March 2004
I believe the Bible is God’s word and God’s law, all of it, is given for our benefit. The vaccine narrative shows how far we, as a society, have departed from God and walked in a lack of trust and faith. First, we disregard his laws on hygiene and sanitation. Second, we come up with a cure (vaccination) that does not address the root of the problem. Of course, the Biblical and historical data does not prove that smallpox, polio and other diseases were eradicated by sanitation but it does make it a possibility. Taken in conjunction with the contemporary medical doctors quoted above, it makes it a probability. I also appeal to common sense: Would an injection really cure a disease if you continued living in filthy conditions? And if you got rid of the filth, would you actually need a prick in the arm as a preventative measure? What the world needed in the days of smallpox was improved public sanitation and better education on personal hygiene.