All about the original and worst vaccine

smallpox

I expect we all have seen this image when googling smallpox. Google is heavily invested in vaccine technology after all. It reminds me of the pictures we have seen of ‘Covid’* patients. Are we really seeing what they say we are? *Someone with common symptoms and a non-specific PCR test.

We are told that the two boys above were infected on the same day and from the same source. We can assume that the method of infection was similar to the vaccination method. The vaccination procedure, until 1895, involved taking the scabs or ‘pox pustular lymph’ fluid (that is, the toxins, decaying and dead cells being expelled from the body in pus) from the pustules of one or more sick patients, and rubbing it into cuts made on the arms of a healthy person. Not surprisingly pox formation and death often resulted from this procedure.

A case report of a previously healthy child after vaccination March 13th, 1891; ‘Fresh vesicles subsequently formed around the vaccination pocks coalescing with them and causing them to spread. They developed also on the face, body, and in the mouth, the later prevented the child from suckling, and it died exhausted on the 45th day after vaccination.’

We cannot know if each boy above had the same amount of pus or whether one had a greater number of cuts made into his arm. If the first cut did not ‘take’-a subjective assessment of the amount inflammation- more cuts and rubbing of pus was often done.

Let’s remember that these poor boys were deliberately infected in the name of science. There were, obviously, no ethical considerations- testing was done on orphans, Catholics and the Irish. Do we therefore trust the integrity of these experimenters to treat both boys in exactly the same way, with the same number of cuts, and the same dilution of toxic pus? From our knowledge of modern pharmaceutical company’s adherence to protocol, when there is a large financial motivation- I would say not. Both these boys have pox and their appearance does look like a dose-dependent response to a toxin.

The concept of dosing was not new. People were aware that a small amount of alcohol or small amounts of mercury could prevent subsequent larger amounts making people drunk or killing them. It may even be possible that making cuts in the arms of some children and inserting toxins and heavy metals did make them better able to detoxify larger amounts when they were re-exposed for this abusive experiment.

The lesions on the boy’s skin have nothing to do with viruses and would now be classified as toxic epidermal necrolysis. The lesions are due to a reaction to pharmaceuticals or other intoxicants in the environment. This is the reason that today we only see these lesions on the faces of people in former colonial countries such as Indian and Africa, where they are caused by an insanitary water supply, malnutrition, stress, poverty and experimental pharmaceutical procedures. The lesions and the non-specific symptoms of detoxification are reclassified as measles, chickenpox or monkeypox at will.

There is no evidence that covid, smallpox or monkey pox are caused by infectious viruses. There are no vials of deadly viruses in any lab anywhere in the world.

The poxes (chicken, small and monkey) are notoriously difficult to distinguish. If we accept that they pox and pustules are generalised symptoms of detoxification, and a healthy response to toxins then the cellular proteins that are produced in the poxes, mistakenly thought to be viral, may be involved in the stimulation of pox formation. Directly exposing someone to these proteins may then cause the detox response and form poxes. This also explains why vaccines often produce the symptoms they are supposed to prevent, for example, the shingles vaccine causing shingles symptoms.

Someone previously exposed to these stimulatory proteins be injection directly into the blood, may have developed an antibody response. Antibodies are not involved in attacking but in recognition and regulation of proteins. The antibodies would recognise the injected proteins as ‘foreign’ to the body. When the body produced these proteins in response to a stimulus, they would be damped down by the antibodies. This is not a good thing to do. Suppressing with vaccines the chicken pox, which is most probably a developmental phase of detoxification, has been shown to increase the risk of tumours and shingles later in life. The boy on the right above may not be showing poxes but we don't know his outcome in later life nor the effect of not detoxing.

Whatever the case, in this ‘experiment’ above there is only one person in each group (and there may be many reasons why one boy is less susceptible to a toxin that another), and not a randomised, blinded, placebo controlled trial. It is therefore meaningless scientifically, though admittedly it is very powerful propaganda. The pustules on the boy on the left seem to cover his entire face and would be very painful. He doesn’t seem to be in distress and appears to be normal weight. It is also possible that theatrical make up was used.

The story we are told at school of Jenner noticing the complexions of young women working in the dairy industry is embedded deeply into our consciousness. There are many reasons why women in the country, with plenty of fresh air, outdoor exercise and access to fruit and vegetables might fair better, and look fairer than young women living in densely polluted cities. Cities often had poor sewage systems, unclean water, exposed to heavy metals (children were exposed to arsenic, lead, mercury and phosphorus) and without a supply of fresh food leading to many being malnourished. The reasons have nothing to do with an infectious disease. This was also way before pasteurisation so also had nothing to do with access to raw milk vs pasteurised milk.

One of the few detoxification processes available to the body takes place through the skin, forming pox and pustules.There was never any evidence that milk maids having formed the ‘cowpox’ were actually immune to the ‘smallpox’ at all. Indeed there is no evidence that cowpox ‘disease’ extended beyond lesions on the udders of cows and the palms of milkmaids from the repeated milking process and use of detergents. In Jenner’s 1796 experiments he saw that smallpox didn’t develop in deliberately infected middle-aged people who had been previously exposed to cowpox. However, middle aged people were not thought to be susceptible to smallpox and it turned out that these people had not been previously exposed to the cowpox after all. Jenner also infected 6 previously vaccinated children using fluid obtained from the scanty number of pox on patients with a very mild form of illness. This pus fluid seemed to have no effect in the vaccinated. Though neither did it affect the unvaccinated.

There was never a trial comparing even sized groups of vaccinated and unvaccinated. The observational evidence overall suggested that vaccination had no benefit and in fact, in places where records were kept, was positively correlated with increase in the death rate. Please see Alfred Wallaces’s brilliant analysis of the data ‘Vaccination a delusion’ presented to the government in 1898.

‘They declare that "there is no proof that sanitary improvements were the main cause of the decline of small-pox… To the accuracy of these statements I demur in the strongest manner. There is proof‘

This correspondence… proves that small-pox obeys, and always has obeyed, the same law of subservience to general sanitary conditions as the other great groups of allied diseases and the general mortality.’

‘This brief statement of the early history of vaccination has been introduced here in order to give what seems to be a probable explanation of the remarkable fact that a large portion of the medical profession accepted, as proved, that vaccination protected against a subsequent inoculation of small-pox, when in reality there was no such proof, as the subsequent history of small-pox epidemics has shown. Again and again they asked the witnesses above referred to to explain how it was possible that so many educated specialists could be thus deceived.’

The data for Leicester, England;

The blue line is the percentage vaccination and the grey line small pox deaths for Leicester England, where ‘anti-vaxxers’ rebelled against compulsory vaccination in 1885. The residents wanted to stop their children from being injured and killed by the vaccine. Some parents were fined and imprisoned for refusing to vaccinate children after their siblings had died or been injured. And contrary to today’s propaganda on the web, ‘overall child mortality declined while vaccination rates plummeted.’

Wallace comments ‘In the whole of the nineteen years 1878-1896 inclusive, unvaccinated Leicester had so few small-pox deaths that the Registrar-General represents the average by the decimal 0.01 per thousand population, equal to ten per million, while for the twelve years 1878-1889 there was less than one death per annum! Here we have real immunity, real protection; and it is obtained by attending to sanitation and isolation, coupled with the almost total neglect of vaccination.’

‘After the 1872 pandemic (which looks very much like it was caused by the vaccine) even more people lost confidence in the vaccination. They began asking the question as to whether better sanitation, hygiene, improved housing and nutrition were better ways to deal with smallpox. The tide was beginning to turn against both the medical profession and the law.’

‘By the early 1890’s, there were those who recognised that sanitation and child labour laws had done what vaccination had failed to do; to conquer smallpox. Smallpox vaccination was on the decline, yet smallpox, like other diseases, was disappearing’.

🐒

1. Dissolving Illusions Humphries and Bystrianyk

2. https://viroliegy.com/2022/01/05/was-smallpox-really-eradicated/

3. http://people.wku.edu/charles.smith/wallace/S536.htm