Yes, just this week I investigate the claims made on a wikipedia article on small pox, there was no proof of the claim in the 6th edition and there is no reason to believe that going out there and finding the 4th edition will show the claim and even less the sources of it, as the whole book is full of bogus crap that is purported as science and used in educating the unquestioning doctors and physicians in our country.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
Dude, cowpox was used to successfully shown to protect people against smallpox as early as the late 1700's/early 1800's. To further this, cowpox exposure had actually been observed to protect people against small pox for perhaps thousands of years if we are to look at Iranian nomadic peoples. [Source]
What the heck you talking about? What bogus information?
Indistinguishable angenically not indistinguishable. The only thing full of crap here is what you are posting.
Statistics explains that it works. Give people cowpox as a vaccine, see reduction in small pox cases that is statistically relevant over a long period of time? Well guess what bub, then the coxpox inoculation is the causative agent for protection from the small pox.
All you are showing me is that the vaccination does not provide 100% immunity, okay. So what? Again you are misinterpreting things.
Could you please stop spamming me with your nonsense? Talking with you will get me nowhere, you are a lost cause. So I am not going to bother.
Edit: I am not bullying you in any capacity. I asked quite nicely if you could please stop spamming me. Thanks! Its a waste of both of our time.