View report page

recorded and the public are given to understand that these are the
normal occurrences. Uouid any tiling be more untrue ! on the one
hand, immunisation which, apart from accident, carelessness or
ignorance, is perfectly sate, and on the otner, diplitiierla which is
responsible for a continuous record of tragedies, have their results
transposed. The deatiis from diphtheria, amounting annually to
many thousands in the civilised world, are dismissed as of no
account. Such a calamity as removal to hospital of a family of
eleven reported on April 20th in the daily Press (mother, seven
daughters, father and two sons, one of whom died shortly after
removal to hospital) and the record of deaths from diphtheria even
in this Borough continued year by year, deaths which must continue
unless the general public will take the protection which is available,
are lightly dismissed as being the result of a "healing crisis '
or a "cleansing process." Immunisation is represented as horribly
dangerous and, moreover, entirely lacking in efficacy. During the
last nine years over 5,000 persons have been immunised in Hackney
without any ill result. The number would, of course, have been
considerably larger if it were not for the activities of the ''anti''
societies in the Borough. Among those immunised persons eight
have contracted mild diphtheria, so mild that it was difficult to
establish the diagnosis and the patients, in a few days, were well.
They were never at any time in danger. The number of cases
among the immunised persons is, however, few as compared with
the number of cases one would expect among an equal number of
unimmunised persons, but I would suggest so extremely untrue is
the statement that diphtheria is a "healing crisis" that even if the
same number of cases occurred among the immunised as among the
unimmunised the process would be still worth while because of the
mildness of attack. But, in fact, the number of cases among the
immunised is merely a fraction of those that would otherwise be
expected, and no immunised child has died from the disease. The
immunised child is not injured in health unless there is an accident
or some remarkable idiosyncrasy. It would not be reasonable to
point out the occurrence of Siamese twins or other such happenings
as normal happenings in child-birth. The immunised child does not
require any medical treatment or interference in daily routine and
should show no ill effects whatever. The immunised child is brought
into the same blood condition as the child naturally immune to the
infection. A very weakly child, particularly one who would succumb
to diphtheria, may show some slight effects but these should not
be sufficient to interfere with schooling or ordinary daily routine, yet
diphtheria is represented as beneficial, immunisation as harmful.
Every parent who has a child immunised knows that the best chance
has been given to the child of escaping the disease entirely and that
if, unfortunately, sufficient immunity has not been given, the disease
will be alleviated and that it can be confidently hoped that the major
tragedy of death will be averted.