Not	many	years	ago	the	‘big
	
bugs’	in	the	medico-scientific	field	had	the	effrontery	to	calmly	state,	in	their
	
public	meetings,	that	the	‘appendix’	served	no	useful	purpose	in	the	body	and	the
	
tonsils	were	the	remains	of	our	‘gills’—left	over	in	our	bodies	when	man
	
emerged	from	the	sea	as	a	land	animal. Now,	students	realize	that	the	appendix
	
helps	to	keep	the	cecum	on	the	safe	side	by	holding	the	putrefactive	bacteria,	in
	
that	blind	sewer,	at	a	safe	level	and	that	the	tonsils	play	important	parts	in	killing
	
disease	organisms	that	would	otherwise	get	into	the	lymphatic	circulatory
	
system. "Yet	in	many	quarters	the	yanking	out	of	tonsils	for	a	fee	and	the	chopping	out	of
	
the	appendix	for	the	doctor’s	wife’s	fur	coat	continue	unabated. Gall	bladder
	
operations	are	still	sending	unfortunates	to	the	insane	asylums	as	of	yore	and	the
	
so-called	‘fixing’	of	stomach	and	intestinal	ulcers	by	‘removing	a	section	of	the
	
anatomy’	with	a	knife,	is	still	considered	good	‘practice’. Yet	even	the	most
	
obstinate	medical	physician	and	surgeon	KNOWS	that	ulcers	are	caused	by	too
	
strong	stomach	chemicals,	digesting	the	mucous	membrane,	and	that	the	proper
	
treatment	is	merely	to	reduce	the	strength	of	such	digestive	chemicals. Smallpox
	
vaccine—which	has	spread	syphilis	throughout	the	civilized	world	is	still
	
‘obligatory’	in	many	parts	of	the	universe	and	the	Schick	vaccine—that	arch
	
killer	of	Japanese	babies	in	the	hands	of	our	army	‘brass	hat	doctors’—is	still
	
being	used	as	a	‘professional	fee	getter’	although	it	still	curtails	the	infant
	
population. "Altogether	,	the	situation	seems	to	be	getting	worse—not	better. And	the	Salk
	
vaccine—for	all	its	blatant	propaganda,	for	all	its	high	endorsement	by	the
	
Public	Health	Department	of	our	kindly	government—is	failing	dismally	just	as
	
Duon	H.	Miller,	of	Coral	Gables,	Florida,	predicted	it	would	fail. "Let	us	look	again	at	this	rotten	laboratory	concoction—this	Salk	vaccine	made
	
from	the	diseased	kidney	of	a	tortured	monkey. If	you	will	recall,	the	proponents
	
of	this	polio	medicine	never	CLAIMED	that	it	would	PREVENT	POLIO. Those
	
gentlemen	of	the	dollar	sign	merely	said	that	it	would	PROBABLY	prevent	the
	
paralysis	which	followed	or	accompanied	the	usual	polio. They	KNEW	that
	
nothing	that	could	be	‘shot’	into	the	clean	bloodstreams	of	the	youngsters	would
	
lower	the	sugar	content. And	manifestly	it	was	the	excessive	sugar—taken	into
	
the	infant’s	body	in	the	summertime	in	the	shape	of	ice	cream,	cola	and	other
	
soft	drinks,	candy	and	like	sweets—that	BROUGHT	ON	POLIO. No	question	about	that! All	medical	books	show	that	polio	does	not	exist	in
	
those	countries	where	the	consumption	of	sugar—refined	sugar—is	less	than	90
	
pounds	per	person. "Well,	anyway,	the	American	people	were	sold	a	‘bill	of	goods’	by	those	stuff-
shirted	individuals	back	of	this	Salk	concoction. And	it	was	the	sainted	‘March
	
of	Dimes’	parasites	who	did	that	‘selling’. No	question	about	it—the	‘March	of
	
Dimes’	had	to	come	up	with	some	new	‘gadget’	to	keep	the	dimes	rolling	in	so
	
that	the	motley	array	of	individuals	on	that	expanded	payroll	might	still	receive
	their	lush	salaries	And	the	gist	of	the	whole	‘selling	campaign’	was	not	that	the
	
Salk	vaccine	would	CURE	POLIO	or	would	even	PREVENT	POLIO. But	it	was
	
emphasized	that	this	Salk	monkey	juice	WOULD	PREVENT	THE	PARALYSIS
	
WHICH	FOLLOWED	POLIO. "That	PREVENTION	OF	PARALYSIS	was	what	actually	‘sold’	the	American
	
people	on	this	Salk	concoction. Polio,	without	paralysis,	was	not	feared. The
	
reason	millions	of	parents	were	willing	to	‘take	a	chance’	with	their	children	and
	
toss	them	onto	the	table	of	‘medical	experimentation’—the	reason	they	were
	
willing	to	have	their	offspring’s	bloodstream	contaminated	by	this	Salk	filth—
was	in	the	hope	it	MIGHT	PREVENT	POLIO	PARALYSIS. "As	Al	Smith	would	have	said	‘Let	us	look	at	the	record.’	Most	of	you	know	that
	
during	1955,	millions	upon	millions	of	little	American	children	had	their
	
bloodstreams	filled	with	this	Salk	vaccine. Some	got	one—some	got	two	and
	
some	even	get	three	‘shots’. So,	in	this	year	of	1956—if	this	monkey	juice	was
	
any	good	at	all—the	number	of	cases	of	polio	should	have	been	almost	wiped
	
out	and	PARALYSIS,	FOLLOWING	the	few	cases	of	polio	which	did	SLIP
	
THROUGH,	should	be	practically	nil. "Right	in	line	with	the	above	is	a	report,	issued	in	Washington,	D.	C.	on	May	11,
	
1956,	as	appeared	in	the	New	York	Times. ‘Through	1956	through	last	Saturday,	May	4th	(four	months	of	1956)	there	had
	
been	1,463	polio	cases,	broken	down	into	803	paralytic,	399	non-paralytic	and
	
261	UNSPECIFIED. In	1955—same	period	(four	months)	there	was	1,599
	
cases,	437	nonparalytic	and	459	unspecified. PARALYTIC	CASES	numbered
	
703.’
	
"There	you	have	in	black	and	white	the	DEFINITE	RESULTS	of	this	Salk
	
preventative	paralysis	vaccine. Although	tens	of	thousands	of	children	received
	
the	Salk	trash	in	1955	which	should	have	PROTECTED	THEM	FROM
	
PARALYSIS—there	were	over	12%	MORE	PARALYSIS	CASES	in	1956	than
	
in	1955. Just	how	gullible	do	the	medical	authorities	believe	the	American
	
people	are? The	medical	men	should	know	that	the	average	layman	can	read
	
figures	and	make	comparisons. So	let	us	not	permit	these	medical	double	talkers
	
to	blind	us	further. What	is	the	good	of	CUTTING	DOWN	THE	POLIO	CASES
	
IF	MORE	OF	THOSE	WHO	ARE	STRICKEN	BECOME	PARALYZED? And
	
what	is	EVEN	MORE	dreadful	to	contemplate	is	the	thought	of	what	may	be	the
	aftermath	of	this	placing	in	a	child’s	bloodstream	of	this	rotten,	filthy	juice	from
	
the	diseased	kidney	of	a	dead	monkey? Vaccination	for	smallpox	spread	syphilis
	
throughout	the	world. And	we,	Naturopaths,	are	now	wondering—what	will	this
	
Salk	filth	conjure	up?" HEALTH	RESEARCH,	MOKELUMNE	HILL,	CALIFORNIA. Dear	Sirs:
	
May	I	congratulate	you	on	your	splendid	work. There	are	probably	many	moments	of	discouragement	when	you	ask	yourself,
	
"Is	it	worth	it	all?" It	is! It	is	only	through	public	enlightenment	that	an	end	can
	
be	made	to	the	abuses	of	the	drug	trust	and	the	medical-bund. Organizations	such	as	yours	are	capable	of	slowing	down	the	drug	and	vaccine
	
steamroller. If	you	were	not	hurting	them	or	if	they	did	not	fear	you,	they	would
	
not	attempt	to	persecute	you. My	personal	knowledge	of	the	medical	bund	is	of	an	intimate	nature. I	hold	the
	
B.Sc.,	M.	A.,	and	Ph.D.	degrees	from	New	York	University. I	did	graduate	work
	
on	a	grant	from	the	medical-bund	controlled	National	Foundation	for	Infantile
	
Paralysis. I	am	a	graduate	of	an	A.	M.	A.	approved	school	of	Physical	Therapy
	
and	Rehabilitation. I	have	had	clinical	training	in	the	finest	hospitals	in	New
	
York,	including	Bellevue	Hospital,	St.	Vincents	Hospital,	Hospital	for	Joint
	
Diseases,	Brooklyn	Veterans	Administration	Hospital,	St.	Giles	Hospital,
	
PostGraduate	Medical	School	Hospital,	and	several	others. I	have	been	on	the	staff	of	the	New	Jersey	State	Department	of	Health,	and	was
	
in	complete	charge	of	the	Monmouth	County	Cerebral	Palsy	Treatment	Center. For	the	past	three	years	I	have	been	executive	director	of	the	Homestead
	
Rehabilitation	Institute	(and	still	am	at	this	writing.) My	experiences	have	enabled	me	to	observe	from	within	the	workings	of	official
	
medicine. At	first,	I	could	not	believe	what	I	saw. Were	the	truth	concerning	medical	treatment	and	so-called	prevention	ever	to
	
leak	out,	the	stench	of	it	would	obliterate	the	public	confidence	in	the	medical
	
profession	and	put	an	end	to	the	fantastic	drug	trust	profits. Good	people,	like	you,	are	battering	at	the	A.	M.	A.	stainless	steel	curtain
	
attempting	to	open	a	seam	so	that	the	light	of	day	can	enter	the	dark	and	secret
	
places	where	the	facts	are	hidden. That	stainless	steel	curtain	is	strong,	but	it	is	far	from	being	invulnerable. Truth
	
is,	in	the	long	run,	the	hardest	substance	in	existence—capable	of	boring	through
	
any	tissue	of	lies,	no	matter	what	its	composition. You	may,	if	you	wish,	publish	my	letter	in	part	or	in	whole—and	you	may	use
	
my	name. Please	do	not	use	it	until	after	September	15,	1956. Until	that	date,	I
	
shall	remain	economically	vulnerable	to	medical	bund	attack. After	that	date,	I
	
shall	be	a	practicing	member	of	the	great	and	honorable	Chiropractic	profession
—having	recently	won	my	D.C.,	degree	after	four	arduous	years	of	secret	study. Keep	up	the	good	work,	and	may	the	Lord	bless	you. Sincerely,
	
Dr.	Milton	Fried,	D.	C.
223	Prospect	Ave.
Suite	A. A.
Hackensack,	New	Jersey
	
"In	the	minds	of	the	American	people,	partly	because	of	the	foundation’s
	
National	Foundation	FOR	Infantile	Paralysis)	fundraising	campaigns,	polio	had
	
come	to	seem,	a	major	public	health	problem	which,	in	terms	of	statistics,	it	is
	
not. For	fifteen	years	Americans	had	been	contributing	to	the	March	of	Dimes,
	
and	they	wanted	results. The	Foundation,	acting	as	their	agent,	was	determined
	
to	have	vaccine	available	at	the	earliest	possible. "Park,	Davis	(Chemical	manufacturers)	had	a	special	reason	for	pushing	its
	
vaccine	development	program. The	company	had	suffered	a	serious	financial
	
setback. It	had	gambled	heavily	on	Choromycetin,	an	antibiotic,	only	to	have	the
	
bottom	drop	out	of	the	market	after	disturbing	indications	that	the	new	wonder
	
drug	might,	under	some	conditions,	cause	fatal	blood	disorders. The
	
stockholders	were	asking	blunt	questions,	and	management	was	understandably
	
on	the	lookout	for	a	new	product	sufficiently	spectacular	to	wipe	out	the	memory
	
of	Chloromycetin. POLIO	VACCINE	SEEMED	A	GOOD	BET,	and	in	the	early
	
spring	of	1953,	after	spending	a	little	over	$1	million	on	research,	Park,	Davis
	believed	its	own	experimental	vaccines	were	READY	FOR	TESTING	ON
	
CHILDREN." SALK	VACCINE:	THE	BUSINESS	GAMBLE	By	Spencer	Klaw,	p.	125-126,
	
Sept,	1956	issue	of	FORTUNE	MAGAZINE. Is	there	a	connection	between	the	Salk	vaccine	and	the	transmission	of	monkey
	
encephalitis	to	a	number	of	mental	patients	in	Germany? Those	who	are
	
interested—should	read	page	xxxi	of	Doctors	of	Infamy	by	Alexander
	
Mitscherlish	(who	testified	at	Nuremberg). June	28,	1955
	
Polio	Prevention,	Inc.
Coral	Gables,	Florida
	
Gentlemen:
	
Enclosed	are	the	newspaper	clippings	of	the	death	of	my	8	year	old	son	Charles
	
Bynaker. In	these	eight	years	I	had	a	happy	life	until	someone	came	up	with
	
polio	"shots"	which	took	him	away	from	me. They	say	he	had	a	brain	abscess	but	I	know	he	didn‘t,	because	he	never	got	sick
	
until	he	took	the	shot. He	took	it	on	Thursday	and	came	home	Thursday	evening,
	
from	school	sick	and	the	last	words	he	said	to	me	just	before	he	died
	
were..."Mommy	the	old	shot	made	me	sick." Now	can	you	understand	how	I	feel? If	I	had	10	more	kids	they	would	never	take
	
the	shots. Many	people	who	saw	him	knew	he	was	not	sick	until	he	took	the
	
shot. As	bad	as	I	need	a	child,	I	can	never	have	anymore	of	my	own. If	I	had	it	to	do
	
over	again,	I	would	never	sign	the	paper. I	am	a	mother	whose	life	has	just	been
	
slapped	in	the	face. I	know	he	did	not	have	abscess	of	the	brain. I	know	why	they	said	he	had. That
	
was	because	they	thought	I	would	sue	someone. Well	all	the	money	in	the	world
	
won’t	bring	him	back. They	also	wanted	to	cut	his	head	to	pieces,	but	I	didn‘t	let	them	I	took	him	to	the
	
hospital	in	one	piece	and	I	meant	to	bring	him	back	the	same	way. I	know	how	rotten	this	polio	vaccine	is	and	it	is	nothing	but	a	killer. He	was
	
paralyzed	from	his	waist	up	and	died	like	that. I	found	out	who	put	it	out,	but	maybe	they	lied	again. They	said	it	was	put	out	by
	
Lilly	Co.,	but	they	have	lied	so	much	to	me	I	just	don’t	know	what	to	believe
	
anymore. They	did	not	want	to	tell	me	who	put	it	out	or	what	doctor	gave	the
	
shot. They	say	it	was	free	to	all	children,	but	lets	stop	and	look	what	I	had	to	pay. I	am
	
not	a	rich	person	and	I	had	no	insurance	so	it	leaves	me	in	a	pretty	bad	spot. Hospital	bills	totaling	$163.75,	plus	burial	expenses	of	$358.00. Now	do	you	see
	
where	there	is	anything	free	to	it? I	hope	you	will	send	me	the	facts	about	this	child	killer	vaccine,	that’s	all	it	is. I
	
know	the	shot	killed	my	son. They	had	him	in	the	iron	lung	from	Saturday	night
	
until	he	died	Sunday	evening. I	wish	all	mothers	could	read	my	letter	so	they	would	not	have	to	be	broken
	
hearted	like	I	am	now;	so	please	feel	free	to	publish	any	part	of	my	letter. Yours	truly,
Margaret	Bynaker
	
Rt. 2
Dayton,	Va.
	
A	FATHER	ASKS:	"ARE	WE	GUINEA	PIGS?" Nashville	Banner,	June	13,	1959
	
Editor’s	Note:	The	Banner	has	carried	reports	of	official	actions	in	connection
	
with	the	refusal	of	Ben	Gamble,	Edenwold	Road,	to	allow	his	children	to	be
	
inoculated	with	Salk	vaccine. He	has	asked	this	newspaper	for	the	privilege	of
	
stating	his	side	of	the	case. His	statement	follows:
	To	the	Editor	of	TheBanner:
	
"Are	We	Guinea	Pigs?" For	the	benefit	of	an	uninformed	public	I	would	like	to	make	my	position,	in
	
refusing	to	have	my	children	inoculated	with	the	Salk	vaccine,	better	understood. I	am	not	a	belligerent	person,	neither	am	I	a	conformist. I	try	to	obey	the	laws	of
	
the	land,	except	where	I	think	they	infringe	my	individual	rights. My	Bible	teaches	me	that	the	Creator	sealed	our	bloodstream	for	specific	reasons
	
and	with	a	lot	more	brains	than	the	human	race	has	today	and	that	he	did	not
	
intend	it	to	be	polluted	with	so-called	serum. Good	health,	in	my	book,	can	be	defined	in	two	simple	words—assimilation	and
	
elimination. We	are	the	product	of	what	we	eat. I	live	in	the	country,	grow	my
	
own	vegetables	on	organically	fertilized	soil	and	we	have	one	cow	from	which
	
we	obtain	pure	milk. I	have	read	where	the	U.	S.	is	the	most	unhealthy	nation	in
	
the	world	and	the	rejections	made	by	the	Armed	Services	seem	to	confirm	this
	
fact. Doctoring	has	become	one	of	the	most	profitable	professions,	simply	because
	
people	have	been	brainwashed	by	clever	advertising	to	think	that	most	of	the
	
foods	we	buy	in	the	stores	is	good	for	us,	when	in	fact	the	reverse	is	quite	true. Our	soil	is	being	ruined	by	chemicals	and	the	foods	we	get	in	the	store	are	all
	
doctored	with	some	form	of	additives	to	prolong	shelf	life. I	wish	you	could	read	the	stacks	of	mail	I	am	receiving	from	people	in	all	walks
	
of	life	who	praise	me	for	the	stand	I	have	taken	against	compulsory	inoculation. I	think	the	following	quotes	from	an	article	which	appeared	in	the	Tri-State
	
Medical	Journal,	February,	1959,	by	Fred	B.	Klenner,	M.D.,	should	be	of
	
interest:
	
"In	1955	we	were	told	by	the	National	Foundation,	the	United	States	Public
	
Health	Service	and	‘lesser’	Public	Health	Departments,	Medical	Societies
	
through	their	political	officers	and	appointees	that	ONE	injection	of	the	currently
	
used	polio	vaccine	would	give	prolonged,	possibly	lifetime	protection. In	1956
	
we	were	told,	after	those	receiving	the	initial	shot	developed	polio,	that	a
	‘booster’	or	second	shot	was	necessary	to	raise	the	protective	antibody	level	to	a
	
height	whereby	90%	protection	against	paralytic	infection	would	be	assured. In
	
1957	we	were	told,	after	those	receiving	the	second	injection	also	developed
	
polio,	that	a	third	‘shot’	was	imperative	to	effect	absolute	protection. For	some
	
this	was	their	fourth	and	even	fifth	boosters. Now	in	1958	we	are	told	that	a
	
fourth	shot	is	"Expedient." Dr.	Joseph	L.	Melnick,	a	professor	at	the	Yale	School	of	Medicine	had	this	to
	
say:	"We	are	not	happy	at	the	prospect	of	inoculating	children	year	in	and	year
	
out	with	the	Salk	vaccine,	for	it	contains	monkey	kidney	protein	which	might
	
(like	the	horse	serum	in	Tetanus	Antitoxin)	produce	allergic	states	if	inoculated
	
repeatedly	over	the	years." All	must	remember	that	the	present	polio	vaccine
	
contains,	besides	monkey	protein,	horse	serum,	formaldehyde,	streptomycin	and
	
penicillin	as	well	as	indicator	dye	and	preservatives,	some	of	which,	are	also
	
allergens. Feinberg	reported	the	possibility	of	primary	sensitization	to	penicillin
	
in	very	low	concentrations	and	stated,	"The	amount	of	penicillin	in	polio	vaccine
	
is	small,	but	judging	by	its	activity	as	determined	by	us	in	tests	of	passively
	
sensitized	skin,	it	is	sufficient	to	produce	reactions	in	highly	sensitive	patients." Zimmerman	reported	on	six	cases	of	penicillin	reactions	to	polio	vaccine	which
	
were	controlled	with	penicillinase. All	physicians	know	that	once	an	allergen	is
	
given	to	any	individual	the	next	dose,	or	the	next	might	produce	an	allergic
	
reaction—and	such	reaction	could	be	fatal. The	PHS	states	that	it	is	doing	everything	possible	to	encourage	production	of
	
more	potent	vaccine,	which	is	an	admission	that	vaccine	to	date	has	been	weak
	
and	worthless. It	means	that	millions	have	received	‘Ostrich’	shots	believing
	
themselves	protected. Dr.	Henry	W.	Kumm,	head	of	the	National	Foundation’s	division	of	virology	and
	
epidemiology	recently	made	the	statement	that	the	Salk	vaccine	for	polio	may
	
soon	be	replaced	by	a	pill. He	stressed	that	"it	(polio)	isn’t	nearly	as	finished	as
	
some	people	think. The	number	of	cases	in	1958	was	larger	than	1942	when	we
	
had	no	Salk	vaccine." Dr.	Kumm	admitted	that	a	live	virus	vaccine	should	be
	
more	efficient	and	should	cost	less. Dr.	John	J.	Hanlon,	director	of	public	health
	
services,	city	of	Philadelphia,	Pa.,	stated	recently	that	"it	is	becoming	clear	that
	
we	must	switch	over	to	live	virus	vaccine	as	soon	as	the	scientists	prove	that	it	is
	
completely	safe	and	effective,	and	it	looks	as	though	this	will	happen	in	the	near
	
future." Too	long,	now,	has	the	medical	profession	only	served	as	a	medium	in
	
expressing	the	views	of	others. Politics	and	politicians	have	no	place	in
	
medicine. Misleading	and	seemingly	deliberate	false	publication	of	figures	and	comments
	
on	the	merit	of	the	so-called	Salk	vaccine	must	forever	be	regretted. In	North
	
Carolina	the	Public	Health	Service	was	claiming	advantage	for	the	vaccine	two
	
years	before	such	injections	were	inaugurated. The	magic	number	of	90%
	
effectiveness	for	the	assumed	killed	virus	vaccine	against	paralytic	polio	has
	
never	been	substantiated. Polio	is	a	complex	infection. There	is	a	definite	reason	which	will	explain	why	a
	
person	comes	down	with	non-paralytic	or	paralytic	disease	or	no	disease	at	all. It
	
is	only	natural	for	those	interested	in	a	specific	program	to	think	that	their	views
	
alone	prevail. Just	why	does	a	person,	vaccinated	triply	or	16	times	or	not	at	all
	
come	down	with	paralysis. Who	can	at	this	moment	say	what	the	factors	are	that
	
give	protection	to	one	group	and	not	to	another;	paralytic	disease	on	one	side	of
	
a	street	and	not	on	the	other. The	fact	that	the	total	number	of	paralytic	cases	increased	in	1958	even	though
	
52,000,000	had	been	triply	vaccinated	is	important	and	significant. Paralytic
	
disease	in	1958	was	up	43%	over	1957	in	spite	of	the	fact	that	approximately
	
25,000,000	more	persons	had	received	the	injections. There	is	an	old	saying	"It	isn’t	the	things	we	don’t	know	that	bothers	us,	but	the
	
things	which	we	know	and	which	are	not	true." I	think	J.	H.	Tilden,	M.D.,	puts	it	about	right,	when	he	said,	"It	is	exceedingly
	
difficult	to	secure	an	honest	hearing	for	any	criticism	of	authority. Established
	
beliefs	are	well	nigh	invulnerable	because	they	are	accorded	infallibility	by	the
	
masses	who	are	educated	to	believe	that	they	will	be	damned	for	thinking,	and
	
because	of	this,	few	will	tolerate	opposition	of	any	nature	to	anything	they	have
	
been	educated	to	believe. People	who	have	their	thinking	done	for	them	are
	
always	intolerant." It	is	a	truism	that	we	are	living	in	a	time	the	like	of	which	has	never	been	seen
	
before. We	are	front	and	center	in	a	battle	for	men’s	minds. Now	as	never	before
	
it	is	vital	that	we	have	the	truth,	and	yet	there	is	an	active	conspiracy	not	just	to
	
conceal	the	truth	but	even	so	change	the	facts. The	communications	media	are
	concentrated	in	the	hands	of	a	few	men	who	are	thereby	enabled	to	manipulate
	
the	emotions	of	the	American	public	at	will. In	our	present	day	world	of	new	political	techniques	and	mass	publicity
	
leverages,	the	unknowing	are	at	the	mercy	of	the	knowing	as	never	before,	and	it
	
is	not	at	all	impossible	that	a	clique	wholly	alien	in	aims	to	the	interests	of	the
	
nation	could	gain	the	symbols	and	controls	of	power,	masquerading	as	the
	
"government"	of	the	nation	while,	in	reality,	exploiting	it	as	a	colony	for	their
	
own	private	aims. This	raises	the	question	as	to	how	far	a	man	of	integrity	may	be	morally	and
	
patriotically	bound	to	pursue	a	course	he	knows	to	be	injurious	to	his	well	being. If	you	saw	the	Sister	Kenny	picture	on	TV	June	8th	you’ll	understand	what	I
	
mean. Orthodox	medicine	has	all	but	destroyed	competitive	methods	of	healing
	
such	as	homeopaths,	osteopaths,	chiropractor	and	naturopaths. However,	in	spite
	
of	this	people	are	getting	relief	from	such	methods. People	should	have	the	right
	
to	select	the	Doctor	he	thinks	can	serve	him	best. It’s	not	the	people	who	are
	
wrong—it’s	the	system. BEN	GAMBLE,	Edenwold	Road,	Nashville,	Tenn.
	
TENNESSEE	IS	TO	HAVE	ANOTHER	MONKEY	TRIAL—ONLY	THIS
	
TIME	IT’S	OVER	MONKEY	JUICE
	
BEN	GAMBLE,	Edenwold	Road,	Nashville,	Tenn.
	
Well,	it	took	the	best	legal	talent	the	state	could	muster,	at	taxpayers’	expense,	to
	
defend	their	position	while	I,	as	a	taxpayer,	must	pay	my	attorney	to	protect	my
	
children	from	having	their	blood	polluted	with	this	monkey	juice	which	they	say
	
has	been	80%	effective	in	preventing	polio. On	the	face	of	it,	you	know	that’s	not	true	and	the	records	show	we	have	more
	
polio	this	year	than	last. I	may	be	a	"craggy"	faced	person	as	stated	in	June	28th	issue	of	the	Sunday
	
Tennessean	and	I	may	even	be	one	of	the	thousands	of	crackpots	which	Dr.
	
Lentz	mentioned	in	previous	articles. However,	I	am	a	law	abiding	citizen	in
	
what	we	all	hope	is	free	America	and	under	the	Bill	of	Rights	of	our	Constitution
	
I	hope	I	still	have	this	right	to	protect	my	children	from	having	their	blood
	contaminated	with	the	organs	from	some	poor	unfortunate	animal	whose	death
	
and	suffering	must	be	heard	by	my	God	who	promises	to	punish	all	who	disobey
	
his	laws. My	case	is	attracting	worldwide	attention. I	have	received	letters	and	a	great
	
many	statistics	from	several	foreign	countries	where	the	Salk	and	other
	
poisonous	serums	have	been	outlawed. Maybe	a	poor	country	man	like	me	can’t	expect	to	get	his	side	of	this	dirty
	
situation	presented	under	the	Iron	Curtain	laws	which	are	worse	than	those	of
	
Hitler	or	Russia	which	are	being	used	to	drug	and	brainwash	us	into	submission. I	may	even	have	to	go	to	jail	because	my	rights	as	a	free	man	have	been	taken
	
over	by	a	more	powerful	money	grabbing	group	who	have	the	means	to	crucify
	
me	on	the	cross	of	freedom. This	case	will	hurt	Tennessee	are	more	than	it	will	me. People	will	hesitate	to	come	here	when	they	learn	what	their	children	must
	
submit	to	before	they	can	go	to	school	here	in	Davidson	County. I	have	received
	
letters	from	all	over	this	country	praising	my	position	in	this	matter	and	I	wish	to
	
quote	the	following	from	a	letter	which	I	recently	received	from	the	health
	
officer	from	one	of	the	largest	cities	in	this	country:
	
"I	am	happy	to	see	you	challenge	the	constitutionality	of	the	Salk	Vaccine	law	in
	
Tennessee. It	seems	to	me	that	your	basic	defense	should	be	along	the	following
	
lines:
Public	Health	authority	re	communicable	disease	control	is	based	on	the	right	of
	
people	to	be	protected	against	an	individual	who	has	a	communicable	disease,
	
and	who	is	therefore	a	threat	to	them. Thus	we	have	the	authority	to	quarantine
	
certain	diseases	e.g. tuberculosis	or	to	require	immunizations	which	are	capable
	
of	preventing	the	spread	of	a	disease	if	the	person	in	question	is	to	associate
	
publicly	with	others,	e.g. smallpox	and	diphtheria	immunizations. In	the	latter
	
cases	the	immunizing	agent	not	only	prevents	deleterious	effects	of	the	disease
	
but	more	pertinently	prevents	the	person	from	being	infected	with	the	disease
	
which	in	turn	makes	him	incapable	of	becoming	a	spreader	of	the	disease. It	is
	
by	preventing	the	infection	that	the	deleterious	effects	of	the	disease	is
	
prevented. From	a	public	health	point	of	view,	then,	when	we	require	quarantine	or
	
immunization	it	is	primarily	to	protect	the	public	at	large	from	the	individual	and
	
only	secondarily	to	protect	the	individual. This	we	can	contrast	to	a	non-
communicable	disease	program	where	our	primary	interest	is	to	protect	the
	
individual,	e.g. we	may	advise	yearly	chest	x-rays	for	the	detection	of	lung
	
cancer	or	periodic	vaginal	exams	and	testing	for	women	to	detect	early	cervical
	
cancer. But	our	authority	does	not	permit	us	to	make	this	mandatory	because	of
	
the	non-communicability	of	the	disease. It	is	for	this	reason	that	our	most
	
important	work	in	health	education	is	accomplished	by	education	and	not	by
	
regulation. Most	states	in	the	United	States	e.g. Illinois,	also	feel	that	even	in	the
	
case	of	communicable	disease	control	through	immunization	it	is	preferred	that
	
in	a	democracy	this	be	accomplished	by	education	rather	than	by	law. (I	can
	
make	available	a	quotation	to	this	effect	from	the	standard	text	on	public	health
	
administration). Now	the	Salk	vaccine	is	a	very	peculiar	immunizing	agent. The	Salk	vaccine	is
	
only	alleged	to	protect	the	individual	from	the	paralytic	effects	of	a	polio
	
infection	in	a	given	individual	by	blocking	the	virus	in	its	passage	from	the
	
alimentary	tract	to	the	nervous	system	through	the	circulating	blood. The
	
evidence	is	extensive	at	present	(and	I	can	give	you	the	literature	on	this)	that	the
	
Salk	vaccine	does	not	prevent	the	alimentary	infection	with	the	polio	virus	so
	
that	the	child	or	adult	vaccinated	with	the	Salk	vaccine	still	remains	a	threat	to
	
others	by	virtue	of	the	continuing	discharge	of	polio	virus	from	his	throat	and
	
from	the	intestinal	tract	even	though	he	is	alleged	to	be	protected	from	the
	
paralytic	effects	of	the	infection	by	stopping	the	spread	from	the	intestinal	tract
	
to	the	central	nervous	system	through	the	bloodstream. The	Salk	vaccine,	then,	is	uniquely	different	from	smallpox,	and	diphtheria
	
immunizations	because	it	does	not	prevent	the	spread	of	the	infection	and
	
therefore	it	does	not	prevent	the	public	from	the	polio	infection	but	it	only
	
protects	the	given	individual	vaccinated	(if	it	works)	from	the	paralytic	effect	of
	
the	disease. To	require	obligatory	vaccination	for	the	sake	of	the	individual	is	radically
	
different	from	requiring	vaccination	for	the	sake	of	the	public	or	for	the	common
	
good. It	infringes	on	a	basic	right	of	an	individual	to	freely	accept	or	reject
	
something	that	is	being	done	to	his	body. This	principle	is	quite	obvious	in
	
surgery. A	patent	has	a	right	to	refuse	what	may	even	turn	out	to	be	a	lifesaving
	
measure. At	any	rate	no	patient	is	operated	upon	unless	he	voluntarily	gives
	written	permission. The	same	applies	to	medication. No	person	can	be	forced	to
	
take	medication	except	under	the	special	circumstances	of	being	a	threat	to
	
others. But	even	in	the	quarantine	law	for	tuberculosis,	where	a	patient	refuses	to
	
undergo	treatment	which	would	make	him	non-communicable	he	still	retains	the
	
right	(intrinsic)	to	remain	quarantined	rather	than	accept	treatment. This	I	believe	then	should	be	your	primary	defense:	the	right	of	an	individual	to
	
refuse	a	vaccination	when	the	effect	of	the	vaccine	at	best	can	only	protect	him
	
and	contributes	no	protection	to	the	public	at	large. Smallpox	and	diphtheria	do
	
both:	they	protect	the	disease	from	spreading,	and	protect	the	individual	from
	
getting	the	infection	and	thereby	the	disease. The	Salk	vaccine	does	not	effect
	
the	spread	of	the	disease	it	only	and	allegedly	protects	the	individual	inoculated
	
from	the	paralytic	effects	of	the	infection. Your	defense,	however,	should	not	stop	here—for	the	following	reasons:
	
1. Most	experts	will	agree	that	enough	time	hasn’t	passed	as	yet	to	really	know
	
whether	the	vaccine	is	effective. At	present,	our	evidence	is	mostly
	
circumstantially	or	statistically	contrived. 2. The	manufacturing	process	of	the	vaccine	has	not	as	yet	been	standardized. a.	Potency	cannot	be	guaranteed,	and	much	of	the	vaccine	on	the	market	since
	
regulations	were	introduced	trying	to	make	the	vaccine	safe	(May	1955	and	Nov.
	
1955)	have	no	potency	or	antigenetic	capacity	at	all. (See	Time	Jan.	19,	1959). Medicine:	Much	of	the	material	used	in	about	200,000	U.	S.	inoculations	has
	
been	no	good. As	a	result,	an	all	out	effort	to	improve	the	commercially
	
produced	vaccine	is	now	being	made. Until	this	succeeds,	individuals	who	have
	
already	had	three	injections	should	get	a	fourth.) b. Safety	cannot	be	guaranteed. Naturally	the	vaccine	is	safer	to	the	degree	that	it
	
has	no	virus	(i.e. antigen	or	potency). However,	the	manufacturing	process	does
	
not	insure	safety	of	the	vaccine. Safety	can	only	be	determined	by:
	
1. Safety	tests	after	the	manufacture	of	the	vaccine. But	the	safety	tests	aren’t
	
foolproof. 2. By	surveilling	its	effect	after	it	has	been	given	to	children. The	Salk	vaccine	is	the	only	approved	drug	on	the	market	which	the	USPHS
	
constantly	surveys	in	order	to	make	sure	that	it	is	safe. If	it	were	intrinsically
	
safe	there	would	be	no	need	for	this. 3. Finally	part	of	the	defense	can	well	center	around	the	fact	that	vested	interests
	
(drug	houses,	National	Foundation	for	Infantile	Paralysis)	and	overcommitted
	
parties	(USPHS,	American	Medical	Association,	mass	communicators,)	and	for
	
the	most	part,	only	those	items	which	are	favorable,	get	to	the	laity	or	the
	
physicians. That	which	is	unfavorable	is	repressed	or	screened	out. For	instance,	the	vaccine	failed	in	the	Hawaiian	epidemic	of	1958. But	the
	
USPHS	stopped	reporting	on	this	in	their	confidential	reports	when	this	was
	
becoming	evident. There	is	much	testimony	to	this	effect. In	this	connection,	two	recent	items	will	interest	you:	a. A	four	line	item	in	the
	
Chicago	Daily	News,	Tues.,	May	5,	1959	London	(UPL):	"Dr.	Jonas	Salk
	
Tuesday	defended	his	polio	vaccine	against	attack	by	the	World	Health
	
Organization." b.	Chicago	Daily	News	5.28.59,	Duluth,	Minn.	(UPI)	"One	of	the
	
developers	of	a	new	oral	polio	vaccine	said	Wednesday	the	recent	use	of	Salk
	
vaccine	in	Israel	had	‘little	if	any	effect.’	Dr.	Herald	R.	Cox	of	Lederle
	
Laboratories,	which	seeks	to	market	the	new	vaccine,	suggested	the
	
ineffectiveness	of	Salk	inoculations	during	a	round	table	discussion	at	the
	
Minnesota	State	Medical	Association	convention. Cox	said	a	confidential	report
	
on	a	polio	epidemic	showed	90%	of	children	under	6	years	old	in	Israel	were
	
given	Salk	shots. But	the	outbreak	became	an	epidemic,	he	said. It	is	evident	that
	
the	vaccine	failed,"	Cox	said. The	Israel	epidemic	occurred	in	1958	prior	to	September. I	have	seen	no
	
reference	to	this	epidemic	in	this	country. There	was	an	item	on	it	in	the	Lancet
	
(a	British	medical	journal)	in	the	Oct.	11,	1958	issue	on	page	766. This	was	a
	
summary	report	on	the	Fifth	European	Symposium	on	Poliomyelitis	held	in
	
Madrid	on	Sept.	3	8-300. Two	reports	are	of	interest:
	
1. "Dr.	Payne	reported	that	Israel	had	an	epidemic	of	several	hundred	cases	in
	
1958,	affecting	equally	those	unvaccinated	and	those	vaccinated	with	Salk’s
	
vaccine	and	technique. Three	doses,	but	certainly	not	two	doses,	"perhaps"	had	a
	
slightly	beneficial	effect." 2. Commercial	vaccines	were	indifferent;	and	we	wanted	them	three	times,	and
	in	some	instances	six	times	more	potent	than	they	were,	especially	as	regards
	
Typell." Aristotle	suggests	in	his	treatise	on	Politics	that	the	electorate,	like	the	medically
	
educated	layman,	the	"user",	so	to	speak,	may	"turn"	out	to	be	a	better	"judge"
	
than	the	experts,	the	statesmen	and	the	political	scientist	on	the	one	hand,	and	the
	
practicing	physician	and	the	medical	scientist	on	the	other. Two	months	ago	at	a	polio	meeting	in	N.	Y.,	I	found	out	that,	in	Israel	70%	of
	
the	vaccine	used	to	immunize	the	children	under	6	was	Lilly	vaccine. In	this
	
country	Lilly	sells	the	most	and	has	the	worst,	but	they	seem	to	have	some	kind
	
of	a	tie	up	with	Salk,	Basil	O’Connor	and	the	USPHS. I	am	running	out	of	time. Under	separate	cover	I	will	send	you	all	my	published
	
writings	on	the	vaccine. Everything	I	have	written	in	the	past	still	holds. I	am
	
sorry	that	my	work	load	has	not	permitted	me	to	write	more. But	when	I	can	get
	
my	hands	on	a	$5,000	grant	to	facilitate	matters	I	intend	to	do	a	book. I	have
	
managed	to	keep	up	on	everything	that	has	been	going	on. If	you	need	more	help	from	me	let	me	know. This	Friday	I	leave	for	the	meetings
	
of	the	American	Medical	Association	in	Atlantic	City	and	will	be	there	for	most
	
of	the	week. Over	the	weekend	I	expect	to	visit	family	in	N.	Y.	and	will	be	back
	
to	my	desk	by	June	17th. I	will	do	what	I	can	for	you,	circumstances	permitting. To	repeat,	however,	my	work	load	gets	heavy	and	pressing	and	I	can’t	always
	
answer	immediately. If	it	is	urgent,	however,	I	will	manage	to. I	do	think,	however,	that	the	North	Carolina	and	Tennessee	law	is	both
	
unconstitutional	and	unwise,	and	I	do	believe	by	demonstrating	this	in	the	court
	
you	will	contribute	a	great	service	to	science." It	was	the	obvious	intent	of	the	1909	Private	Act	to	compel	immunization
	
"shots"	against	communicable	or	contagious	diseases. It	has	never	been	proven
	
that	polio	is	contagious. To	be	consistent	Dr.	Lentz	should	restrict	the
	
intermingling	or	association	between	the	Davidson	County	residents	and	those
	
from	other	areas. It	might	be	interesting	to	know	what	the	incidence	of	polio	is	in
	
adjoining	counties	where	shots	are	not	compulsory	and	where	a	far	less
	
percentage	in	the	40	and	under	group	who	have	availed	themselves	of	this	so-
called	protection. Why	is	it	that	polio	is	on	the	increase	in	spite	of	the	increased	number	taking	the
	Salk	shots. Why	is	it	if	Salk	shots	are	80%	effective	that	there	are	repeated
	
warnings	and	scare	headlines	suggesting	the	possibility	of	a	polio	epidemic. I	am	very	grateful	to	the	Nashville	Banner	for	the	space	they	have	given	me	to
	
present	my	position	in	this	important	matter	which	really	effects	every	family	in
	
our	state	and	I	am	sorry	to	say	that	our	other	newspaper	has	not	seen	fit	to	give
	
me	the	same	privilege,	however,	at	my	trial	I	shall	have	witnesses	from	various
	
parts	of	the	country	who	have	offered	their	services	to	testify	in	my	defense	and
	
if	the	people	can	get	the	true	facts,	I’m	sure	that	during	this	trial,	a	great	many
	
important	facts	shall	be	brought	out	and	I	am	sure	when	it’s	all	over,	justice	will
	
be	done. Ben	Gamble
Edenwold	Road
Madison,	Tenn. THE	AMERICAN	CANCER	SOCIETY
	
"I	believe,	after	a	careful	study,	that	the	policies	of	the	American	Cancer	Society
	
are	open	to	question. "The	American	Cancer	Society	was	organized	in	1913	by	a	group	of	public
	
spirited	physicians	and	laymen. In	1937	the	Society	launched	its	first	annual
	
drive	to	obtain	funds	from	the	public. It	was	an	honest	endeavor,	and	the
	
activities	of	the	Society	during	this	period	can	be	commended. "In	1945	the	Society	was	reorganized. A	group	of	influential	businessmen	joined
	
the	Board	of	Directors,	and	a	program	of	research	was	added	to	complement
	
education	and	service	to	the	cancer	patient. The	new	Board	of	Directors	introduced	two	features	into	the	activities	of	the
	
Society:	get	more	money	from	the	public	and	have	an	exclusively	layman’s
	
society	distribute	funds	for	research. "First,	let	us	consider	who	were	the	‘influential	businessmen’	who,	in	1945,
	
joined	the	Board	of	Directors. Among	the	directors	‘elected’	to	the	new	Board	of
	
the	American	Cancer	Society	were:	Mr.	Elmer	H.	Bobst	(of	William	H.	Warner
	Co.)	who	became	Chairman	of	the	Board,	and	Mr.	James	S.	Adams	(of	Lazard
	
Freres	etc. Co.,	New	York)	who	became	the	Treasurer. "During	the	following	ten	years	the	team	Adams	and	Bobst	has	influenced
	
decisively	the	fate	of	cancer	research	in	America. During	this	time,	Bobst	acted
	
as	the	owner	of	the	various	Warner	enterprises	(mostly	dealing	in
	
pharmaceuticals)	and	Adams	acted	as	the	banker	of	the	Warner	enterprises. (Warner	enterprises	have	recently	been	taken	over	by	Lazard	Freres	etc. Co.)
	
"There	is	a	record	of	Bobst’s	activities	prior	to	his	election	as	the	Chairman	of
	
the	American	Cancer	Society. In	the	book	of	Mr.	Wendel	Berge,	Assistant
	
Attorney	General	of	the	U.	S.:	‘Cartels,	Challenge	to	a	Free	World’	(Public
	
Affairs	Press,	Washington,	D.	C.)	Elmer	H.	Bobst	is	mentioned	among	those
	
who	were	prosecuted	by	the	Dept. of	Justice	for	violation	of	the	antitrust	laws. "On	December	17,	1941,	Bobst	was	found	guilty	by	the	Court,	and	fined	$6,000. "The	violations	of	the	law	of	which	Bobst	was	found	guilty,	included	‘the
	
hostility	of	cartel	members	toward	a	new	product	which	endangers	their	control
	
of	the	market...In	the	field	of	synthetic	hormones	the	cartel	control	has	been	such
	
as	to	be	detrimental	to	our	national	interest.”	(p.	81). "Among	the	methods	used	by	the	cartels	Mr.	Berge	quotes:	‘It	has	attempted	to
	
suppress	the	publication	of	scientific	research	data	which	were	at	variance	with
	
its	monopoly	interest. (p.	84). Research	in	U.	S.	has	been	seriously	affected	by
	
restrictions	imposed	by	foreign	cartel	members’. (p.	58). "Methods	to	increase	money	collected	from	the	public	met	with	success. In	1938
	
the	drive	brought	in	$133,487;	in	1950	this	rose	to	$13,916,	396	and	in	1955	to
	
$24,427,102. "When	a	cancer	drive	for	contributions	is	put	on,	a	scare	and	accomplishment
	
campaign	in	the	public	press	is	put	into	effect. Scare	slogans	are	used	such	as,
	
‘One	in	six	will	die	of	cancer,’	‘Seven	Danger	Signals,’	‘Woman	has	to	learn	to
	
examine	her	breasts	at	regular	monthly	intervals,’	‘Rapid	progress	is	being
	
made,’	‘Startling	discovery,’	‘Knocking	a	hole	in	the	tumor,’	‘Crash	attack	on
	
cancer.’	The	scare	publicity	whips	the	public	to	a	state	of	mass	hysteria. "In	reality,	about	one	in	500	dies	each	year	of	cancer	and	there	have	been	no
	significant	advances	made	by	the	organization	controlled	researchers	of	any
	
importance. "Concerning	the	distribution	of	the	money	to	the	right,	scientists,	wasting	it	on
	
sterile	projects,	or	its	use	for	corruption,	the	public	has	no	chance	to	advise	or	to
	
decide. "The	monopolizing	of	cancer	research	started	immediately	after	the	new	Board
	
was	elected	to	the	American	Cancer	Society. In	time,	it	was	perfected. The
	
public	accepted	the	new	idea,	not	realizing	that	research	money	in	the	hands	of
	
laymen	acting	without	real	control,	would	easily	be	used	by	unscrupulous	people
	
to	corrupt	science. "In	1947	a	new	institution	called	‘The	Damon	Runyon	Memorial	Fund	for
	
Cancer	Research’	was	created. The	Fund	was	successful. As	of	July	1954,
	
$7,689,218	has	been	collected	from	the	public. "The	main	promoter	of	this	Fund	was	the	former	radio	commentator	Walter
	
Winchell. Winchell	was	on	radio	time	paid	for	by	Warner	Co. The	funds	of
	
Damon	Runyon	Memorial	were	and	are	administered	by	the	American	Cancer
	
Society. Large	funds	were	also	obtained	from	the	U.	S.	Atomic	Commission. "There	was	an	intertwining	of	institutions	such	as	the	Jane	Coffin	Childs	fund,
	
the	Babe	Ruth	Foundation	and	others. Through	this	coordination	the	American
	
Cancer	Society	was	in	complete	control	of	public	money	spent	for	cancer
	
research. "Close	relationship	was	created	between	the	Society	and	the	National	Cancer
	
Institute	of	the	U.	S.	Public	Health	Service	to	which	the	Congress	every	year
	
votes	many	millions	of	dollars	for	cancer	research. "Dr.	John	R.	Heller,	Director	of	the	Institute,	became	a	member	of	the	Board	of
	
the	American	Cancer	Society,	and	James	S.	Adams	of	the	American	Cancer
	
Society	became	a	member	of	the	National	Advisory	Council	of	the	Institute. "It	was	now	possible	to	monopolize	this	money	for	projects	agreeable	to	the
	
combine,	and	to	deny	it	to	outsiders. "In	spite	of	the	financial	domination	of	Adams-Bobst,	who	had	every	year	about
	
$50,000,000	to	distribute,	there	are	independent	scientists	who	did	not	cooperate. A	way	was	devised	to	annihilate	them. The	Society	announced	a	new	service,
	
described	by	them	as	follows:	This	service	assumes	a	"watchdog’	responsibility
	
concerning	unscrupulous	attempts	to	exploit	the	universal	suffering	of	cancer	in
	
appeals	for	funds	or	in	respect	to	‘cures’	and	unproved	methods	of	treatment. "They	now	stood	with	the	angels,	wrapped	in	virtue. "Thus	a	layman’s	society	imposes	a	censorship,	self-appointed,	upon	an
	
important	branch	of	science,	promoting	itself	to	a	position	of	scientific	authority. When	this	‘service’	is	consulted,	it	‘warns’	people	not	to	give	money	for	projects
	
to	which	the	Society	is	hostile,	or	to	try	any	treatment	not	approved	by	the
	
Society. "$1,500,000	in	Advertising—In	consequence,	cancer	patients,	pronounced
	
hopeless,	are	deprived	of	the	opportunity	of	getting	relief	from	newly	discovered
	
treatments,	and,	in	addition,	the	ban	of	new	procedures	makes	futile	endeavors
	
by	independents	to	develop	a	new,	successful	method. "It	is	surprising	that	these	activities	of	the	American	Cancer	Society,	which	are
	
detrimental	to	the	public	health,	are	tolerated	and	even	often	supported	by	the
	
American	Medical	Association. In	late	years,	this	Association	has	changed
	
basically. "While	before,	the	Association	acted	as	the	promoter	of	public	health	and
	
clinical	medicine,	now	it	behaves	like	a	union	of	medical	practitioners	which
	
exclusively	promotes	the	welfare	of	its	members	without	regard	for	the	public
	
interest. The	Journal	of	the	AMA,	which	is	regarded	as	the	mouthpiece	of
	
medical	progress,	publishes	many	articles	in	support	of	the	American	Cancer
	
Society	without	careful	investigation	of	their	correctness. "The	American	Cancer	Society	spends	$1,500,000	in	advertising. It	is	obvious
	
that	such	a	sum	must	bring	results,	publicity	wise. On	the	other	hand,	anything
	
critical	of	the	Society	is	not	accepted	for	publication. Money	talks. "The	American	Cancer	Society	is	conscious	of	the	danger	of	losing	public
	
support	as	it	becomes	clear	that	nothing	of	value	is	developed. Therefore,	every
	
year	before	the	drive	for	money	begins,	the	Society	inspires	reports	of
	
"tremendous"	achievements	in	the	press. Statistics	are	quoted	showing	cancer
	
cures	increasing. "These	statistics	are	fortified	by	statements	issued	by	Federal	Government
	
Agencies. “As	a	recent	example,	we	quote	the	information	wired	on	March	20,	1956	to
	
newspapers:	‘Dr. Leonard	A.	Scheele,	the	Surgeon	General	of	the	U.	S.	Public
	
Health	Service,	stated	the	rate	of	cure	in	cancer	cases	increased	in	the	past	ten
	
years	from	15%	to	more	than	50%. These	figures	are	unsupported. Statistics	of
	
the	last	ten	years	would	indicate	this	claim	to	be	absurd. "After	Scheele	lost	his	position	of	Surgeon	General,	he	became	the	President	of
	
Warner-Lambert	Pharmaceutical	Company,	a	corporation	controlled	by	Adams
	
Bobst. "No	action	by	the	government	was	taken	on	the	situation. Could	the	fact	that
	
Bobst	was	important	in	the	Republican	Party	where	he	kept	the	purse	as	its
	
Treasurer	have	had	any	influence? Bobst	also	made	contacts	with	important
	
people	in	the	Democratic	party. "As	a	consequence,	the	problem	of	cancer	is	at	an	impasse,	and	one	of	the	main
	
stumbling	blocks	of	progress	appears	to	be	the	activities	of	the	American	Cancer
	
Society	and	its	affiliates. "Cancer	research	requires	money. The	expense	for	chemicals,	experimental
	
animals,	and	for	salaries	of	indispensable	assistants	and	technicians,	amounts	to
	
considerable	sums	which	only	rarely	can	be	afforded	by	the	research	conduction
	
scientist. The	independent	researcher	must	have	public	support. Many	prominent
	
people,	being	convinced	that	they	help	fight	cancer,	have	made	sacrifices	in
	
time,	work	and	money	to	assist	the	American	Cancer	Society. "When	an	independent	scientist	applies	to	the	American	Cancer	Society,	or
	
associated	organizations,	for	funds,	regardless	of	his	background	or	reputation,
	
he	is	often	put	through	an	agonizing	experience. Needless	to	say,	he	does	not	get
	
any	help. "Funds	collected	by	these	charity	appeals,	go	for	research	and	development	to
	
their	friends. When	a	new,	important	development	is	announced,	the	drug
	
monopoly,	can,	in	this	way,	receive	the	benefit	of	the	public	money	in	the	form
	
of	profits	received	from	the	products	of	their	manufacture	sold	to	the	public. "I	believe	in	capitalism	and	democracy. I	believe	in	the	profit	motive. I	am
	bitterly	opposed	to	Communism. I	am	also	bitterly	opposed,	and	always	have
	
been	to	monopoly. If	a	medical	conspiracy	exists,	it	would	be	particularly
	
damnable	as	it	would	involve	the	matter	of	life	and	death." —Copyrighted	article	by	David	M.	Kasson,	taken	from	Issue	#65,	April,	1957	of
	
The	bidependent,	($3.00	yearly),	225	Lafayette	St.,	New	York	12,	New	York. Reprinted	by	Special	Permission	of	Lyle	Stuart,	Editor	of	the	former,	The
	
Independent	—now	known	as	Expose. June	12,	1959
	
Judge	Homer	B.	Weimar
Court	House
Nashville,	Tenn.
	
Dear	Sir:
	
Articles	in	the	local	papers	relative	to	the	polio	inoculation	program	in
	
Tennessee,	have	been	very	disturbing	to	me. After	years	of	being	president,	following	my	founding	of	Polio	Prevention,	Inc.,
	
and	knowing	the	TRUTH	about	polio,	this	whole	thing	upsets	me. I	am	sending
	
you	a	book	which	you	may	keep,	titled	"The	Poisoned	Needle". Dr	A	J	Shadman,	medical	doctor,	and	perhaps	the	greatest,	published	the	fact	that
	
there	is	no	such	thing	as	a	"virus". Dr.	Shadman	documents	this	in	his	new	book
	
"Who	Is	Your	Doctor	And	Why?" Polio	vaccine	is	based	on	a	non-existent	virus,	therefore	considered	by	all	of	us
	
as	fraudulent. I	understand	I	am	being	called	to	testify	at	the	hearing	which	I’ll
	
gladly	do	because	I’ve	been	in	perhaps	closer	touch	with	polio	situations	than
	
any	other	one	man	in	this	country. I	published	over	five	million	pieces	of	literature,	not	one	word	of	which	has	ever
	
been	refuted	or	disproven. When	the	truth	is	known,	the	people	in	Tennessee	will	be	shocked	beyond
	
description	to	think	that	humans	could	stoop	as	low	as	they	have	in	connection
	with	this	polio	vaccine	which	has	crippled	and	killed	untold	numbers	of	innocent
	
children	as	well	as	adults. I	pray	to	our	Creator	that	the	sealed	bloodstreams	of	the	children	of	Tennessee
	
will	not	be	violated	through	fraud. Respectfully	yours,
Duon	H.	Miller
	
SALK	SHOTS	BLAMED	BY	POLIO	VICTIM’S
	
FATHER
The	Nashville	Banner,	Thurs.,	July	9,	1959
	
	
A	State	Penitentiary	guard,	whose	eight-year-old	son	died	of	polio	Saturday
	
today	vowed	his	daughter,	seven	months,	would	"never"	be	administered	Salk
	
anti-polio	vaccine. "I	firmly	believe	those	shots	put	the	polio	germ	in	my	boy,"	said	Davic	Edwards,
	
whose	son,	Billy	Gene,	had	been	vaccinated	with	a	series	of	three	Sail	shots. "I	should	have	stuck	to	my	feelings	and	never	allowed	him,	or	my	other	children,
	
to	be	vaccinated,"	Edwards	added	tearfully. His	son,	who	would	have	been	a	third	grader	at	Lipscomb	School	this
	
September,	died	at	General	Hospital. The	boy	was	rushed	there	Friday	after	he	began	vomiting. His	temperature	also
	
had	soared,	but	he	was	released	after	treatment. "Early	Saturday	morning	he	couldn’t	even	stand	up,"	said	Edwards. "We	rushed
	
him	back	to	the	hospital...he	died	several	hours	later." The	cause	of	death—paralytic	bulbar	polio—was	determined	after	an	autopsy. Result	of	the	autopsy	was	revealed	Wednesday,	but	Edwards	said	he	has	not
	
received	official	word	from	the	hospital. "All	I	know	is	what	I	read	in	the	paper...that	my	boy	died	of	polio. The	doctor
	said	I’d	be	the	first	to	know	after	the	autopsy,	but	he	hasn’t	called	me	yet,"
	
Edwards	said. Prior	to	death. Edwards	said	his	son	was	apparently	in	a	coma,	had	difficulty
	
breathing	and	couldn’t	talk. "I’ve	always	been	opposed	to	those	shots,"	Edwards	said. "My	wife	has,	too. She
	
never	was	for	them. I	didn’t	want	them	to	give	the	shots	to	my	children,	but	my
	
wife	said	she	was	told	that	if	they	were	to	go	to	school	they’d	have	to	have	them,
	
so	I	gave	in. "I	guess	I	felt	if	I	didn’t	let	the	children	take	the	shots	and	then	one	of	them	came
	
down	with	polio...well,	you	know	what	people	would	say." Edwards	said	he	would	not	allow	one	of	his	daughters,	Wanda	Sue,	seven
	
months,	to	be	given	the	Salk	vaccine. He	said	his	other	six	children,	ranging	in
	
age	from	six	to	14,	all	have	been	given	three	shots	each. He	said	he	would	not
	
allow	them	to	be	administered	the	fourth	shot. Dr.	John	J.	Lentz,	city-county	health	director,	said	he	would	not	attempt	to	have
	
the	children	given	the	fourth	shot. "We	recommend	the	fourth	shot,	but	that’s	all,"	Dr.	Lentz	said. Because	Wanda	Sue	is	not	of	school	age,	Dr.	Lentz	said	there	would	be	no
	
attempt	to	administer	the	vaccine	to	her. “The	death	of	Billy	Gene	was	the	third	attributed	to	polio	in	Tennessee	this
	
year”,	said	Dr.	C.	B.	Tucker,	in	charge	of	the	disease	division	of	the	State	Health
	
Department. Dr.	Tucker	added	that	Billy	was	the	only	one	of	the	three	that	had
	
been	given	the	shots. One	of	the	deaths	was	in	January	in	Knoxville	and	the	other	was	a	Nashville
	
Negro	who	died	last	month. Six	cases	of	polio	have	been	reported	in	the	state	during	1959,	Dr.	Tucker	added. All	had	at	least	one	or	more	Salk	shots. Edwards,	who	resides	with	his	wife	and	children	at	178	Wharf	Ave.,	had	been	a
	
penitentiary	guard	for	two	years. His	son	was	buried	in	Woodbury	Sundayafternoon. Next	month	Ben	Gamble,	a	Nashville	Electric	Service	laborer,	is	to	stand	trial	in
	
Criminal	Court	on	a	charge	of	refusing	to	allow	two	of	his	school	age	children	to
	
be	vaccinated	against	polio. A	special	venire	will	be	called	to	select	the	jury	to	try	Gamble	before	Judge
	
Homer	Weimar. The	jurist	recently	declared	constitutional	a	little	known	state	law	which	requires
	
children	to	be	inoculated	against	various	diseases. Conviction	on	the	charge	is	a	misdemeanour. Gamble	of	Edenwold	has	said	he	feels	the	anti-polio	shots	are	"really	more
	
harmful	than	good." "When	a	boy	reaches	16	nowadays,	his	blood	is	half	full	of	medicine,"	Gamble
	
has	commented. A	quotation	from	"PHILOSOPHY	OF	HEALTH"
	
ADDRESS	BY	MISS	LILY	LOAT
EDITED	BY	J.	H.	TILDEN,	M.D. JANUARY,	1927. "It	may	interest	our	readers,	who	are,	no	doubt,	all	interested	in	the	vaccination
	
question,	to	learn	that	Miss	Lily	Loat,	for	many	years	secretary	of	the	National
	
Anti-Vaccination	League	of	Great	Britain,	has	been	touring	the	states	and	has
	
been	giving	lectures	in	various	parts	of	the	country. From	the	address	given	by
	
Miss	Loat	before	the	English	Annual	Session	of	the	American	Medical	Liberty
	
League	we	quote	the	following	as	reported	through	that	astute	and	courageous
	
paper,	The	Truth	Teller,	of	Battle	Creek,	Michigan:
	
Our	own	fight	against	vaccination	has	been	a	long	and	arduous	battle. While
	
individuals	and	small	groups	were	fighting	for	freedom	in	this	matter	as	far	back
	
as	the	time	of	the	passing	of	the	compulsory	vaccination	act	of	1853.	the
	definitely	organized	struggle	started	with	the	passing	of	the	harsh	vaccination	act
	
of	1867,	which	aimed	at	compelling	every	parent	of	a	child	to	have	that	child
	
vaccinated	within	three	months	of	birth. Those	who	refused	could	be	ordered	by
	
the	magistrates	over	and	over	again	until	the	child	attained	the	age	of	fourteen	to
	
have	it	vaccinated	and	could	be	fined	for	each	refusal	to	comply	with	such
	
magistrates’	orders. This	law	was	passed	on	the	assurance	of	the	leaders	of	the
	
medical	profession	that	vaccination	was	perfectly	safe	and	a	certain	protection
	
against	smallpox. Although	the	sanitary	condition	of	England	had	improved	very
	
considerably	since	the	disastrous	smallpox	epidemic	of	1838	(and	in	this
	
connection	for	some	idea	of	London	in	the	seventeenth	and	earliest	part	of	the
	
eighteenth	century	1	would	refer	you	to	Mrs.	Dorothy	George’s	book,	"London
	
Life	in	the	Eighteenth	Century"). Although	there	was	certainly	a	gradual	improvement,	things	were	still	bad. and
	
between	1853	and	1867	there	were	three	fairly	severe	smallpox	epidemics. The
	
supporters	of	vaccination	played	on	the	fears	of	the	legislators	of	that	day	and
	
secured	the	vaccination	act	of	1867	without	much	trouble. But	in	doing	so	they
	
lit	a	fire	of	resistance	that	has	never	been	quenched	amongst	men	and	women	of
	
the	Anglo-Saxon	race. That	fight	for	freedom	from	medical	tyranny	in	this
	
particular	matter	has	been	waged	in	England	for	nearly	sixty	years	and	it	is	going
	
on	still. For	many	years	it	was	confined	mainly	to	the	poorer	classes. Only	a	very	few
	
men	of	intellect	and	distinction	championed	our	cause. It	was	natural	that	most
	
of	the	disasters	due	to	vaccination	should	fall	on	the	poorer	classes	and	that	those
	
classes	should	publish	them	while	the	upper	and	middle	classes	would	be	more
	
likely	to	keep	such	things	to	themselves. But	by	degrees	what	might	be	called
	
the	artisan	class,	the	smaller	shopkeepers	and	the	lower	middle	classes	became
	
the	backbone	of	the	movement. They	paid	large	sums	in	fines,	they	had	their
	
goods	seized	and	sold	when	they	could	not	or	would	not	pay	fines. Those	who
	
had	no	goods	or	would	not	let	them	be	seized	went	to	prison,	some	were	ruined,
	
and	some	emigrated	to	avoid	ruin. There	are	men	living	in	America	today	whose
	
parents	left	England	on	account	of	the	harsh	vaccination	acts. The	public	saw	honorable,	upright	men	appearing	again	and	again	before	the
	
magistrates	and	many	began	to	ask	what	it	could	mean	when	such	men	were
	
willing	to	go	to	such	lengths	to	save	their	children	from	the	operation. Inquiry
	
was	usually	followed	by	conversion	to	our	side	and	the	side	of	resistance	went
	
higher	and	higher. Defense	funds	were	formed	all	over	the	country	to	assist
	resisters	either	to	pay	the	fines	inflicted	on	them	or	to	keep	the	wives	and
	
families	when	the	men	went	to	jail. In	more	than	one	case	a	widow	went	to
	
prison	for	carrying	out	her	husband’s	injunction	never	to	have	the	children
	
vaccinated. Elections	for	boards	of	guardians—the	public	authority	that	had	the
	
administration	of	the	vaccination	law	in	its	charge—were	fought	on	the
	
vaccination	question,	and	by	the	year	1898	at	least	one-fifth	of	the	600	or	more
	
boards	in	England	were	pledged	not	to	enforce	the	law. Four	very	important	things	happened	between	the	passing	of	the	vaccination	act
	
of	1867	and	the	passing	of	the	act	of	1898,	which	contained	the	first	conscience
	
clause. The	first	was	the	smallpox	epidemic	of	1870-72,	which	carried	off	44,000
	
persons	in	England	and	Wales	and	proved	to	hundreds	of	thousands	of	people
	
that	vaccination	is	not	a	protection	against	smallpox,	for	that	epidemic	occurred
	
when	97½%	of	the	people	over	two	and	under	fifty	had	either	had	smallpox	or
	
been	vaccinated,	as	was	stated	by	Sir	John	Simon,	chief	medical	officer	to	the
	
Privy	Council,	in	his	evidence	before	the	select	committee	which	in	1871
	
inquired	into	the	vaccination	act	of	1867. The	second	very	important	event	was	the	passing	of	the	great	public	health	act	of
	
1875. The	sanitarians	had	been	preaching	for	years	that	unless	the	laws	of	health
	
were	observed	no	country	could	be	free	from	any	form	of	zymotic	disease,	while
	
the	vaccinators	said,	in	effect,	that	you	could	be	as	filthy	as	you	liked,	only	be
	
vaccinated	and	you	would	be	saved	from	smallpox. The	epidemic	of	1870-72
	
showed	that	the	sanitarians	were	right	and	this	great	act	which	governs
	
practically	all	sanitary	observances	in	England	today	was	passed	by	Parliament
	
some	two	years	after	the	close	of	the	epidemic. The	third	great	event	was	the	conversion	of	two	men	high	up	in	the	medical
	
profession	to	our	side,	namely,	Dr.	Charles	Creighton	and	Professor	Edgar	M.
	
Crookshank. There	had	been	many	other	registered	doctors	who	had	fought
	
vaccination	in	England,	right	from	the	time	Jenner	introduced	his	discovery,	but
	
they	were	not	of	the	standing	of	these	men	and	they	did	not	write	such
	
comprehensive,	logical,	dispassionate	and	scientific	books	as	these	two	men	did. Dr.	Creighton	was	asked	about	the	year	1884	to	write	the	article	on	vaccination
	
for	the	ninth	edition	of	the	Encyclopedia	Britannica. He	agreed	to	do	so,	but
	
instead	of	contenting	himself	with	the	usual	stock	statements	he	went	right	back
	
to	Jenner’s	own	writings	and	to	contemporary	documents. He	searched	the	pro-
	
and	anti-vaccination	literature	of	many	countries	and	came	to	the	conclusion	that
	vaccination	is	a	"grotesque	superstition." He	wrote	to	the	editor	of	the
	
Encyclopedia	Britannica	and	said:
	
	
"If	you	want	an	apologetic	article,	I	am	not	the	man	to	write	it." The	editor
	
promised	to	publish	whatever	he	wrote	and	so	in	the	ninth	edition	of	the
	
Encyclopedia	the	article	on	vaccination	is	an	anti-vaccination	article. About	the
	
same	time	Creighton	wrote	a	little	book	called	"Cowpox	and	Vaccinal	Syphilis"
	
and	a	year	or	so	later	a	larger	book	called	"Jenner	and	Vaccination." In	1887	Dr.	Edgar	M.	Crookshank,	who	at	that	time	was	professor	of	pathology
	
and	bacteriology	at	King’s	College,	was	asked	by	the	government	to	investigate
	
an	outbreak	of	cowpox	in	Wiltshire. Sir	James	Paget	drew	his	attention	to
	
Creighton’s	work,	evidently	hoping	that	Crookshank	would	refute	it,	but	the
	
results	of	his	laborious	investigations	are	contained	in	two	large	volumes	entitled
	
"The	History	and	Pathology	of	Vaccination",	in	which	he	says	that	the	credit
	
given	to	vaccination	belongs	to	sanitation	and	isolation	and	that	nothing	would
	
more	redound	to	the	credit	of	the	medical	profession	than	to	give	up	their	faith	in
	
vaccination. Although	written	some	forty	years	ago,	these	books	have	never	been	answered. The	fourth	great	event	in	this	period	was	the	appointment	of	a	royal	commission
	
to	inquire	into	certain	aspects	of	the	vaccination	question. This	commission	was
	
appointed	in	1889	and	sat	for	seven	years. It	issued	six	reports	and	reported
	
finally	in	1896. When	they	were	appointed	nearly	all	the	commissioners	were	strongly	in	favor
	
of	vaccination	and	although	most	of	them	never	surrendered	their	faith	in	the
	
operation,	after	hearing	evidence	from	the	anti-vaccinists,	they	unanimously
	
agreed	that	at	least	repeated	prosecutions	for	the	same	child	ought	to	be	stopped. Two	of	them	issued	a	minority	or	dissent	report,	which	is,	in	effect,	an	anti-
vaccination	document. Even	the	majority	commissioners	went	so	far	as	to	admit
	
that	vaccination	was	not	a	permanent	protection	against	smallpox	and	that	it	had
	
done	injury—injury	that	was	not	inconsiderable	in	gross	amount. They
	
suggested	that	in	the	case	of	genuine	objectors	the	compulsory	law	should	be
	
relaxed,	but	this	was	in	the	hope	of	stopping	the	agitation	against	vaccination
	
rather	than	from	any	kindly	feeling	for	the	objectors. The	result	of	the	commissioners’	report	was	the	vaccination	act	of	1898. In	its
	
first	form	this	did	not	contain	a	conscience	clause,	but	it	did	contain	a	clause
	
forbidding	repeated	penalties	for	the	same	offense. An	election	at	the	town	of
	Reading,	fought	on	the	vaccination	question,	induced	the	government	to	insert	a
	
conscience	clause	into	its	vaccination	act. This	was	against	the	wishes	of	a	large
	
number	of	its	own	supporters,	but	although	they	lost	the	election,	they	carried
	
out	their	promise	and	passed	the	bill	with	the	conscience	clause	included. This	conscience	clause,	which	the	anti-vaccinists	had	opposed,	knowing	that	its
	
passage	into	law	would	greatly	delay	the	repeal	of	the	compulsory	clauses	of	the
	
vaccination	acts,	was	a	very	poor	affair. Bench	after	bench	of	magistrates	refused
	
to	grant	exemption,	no	matter	how	strong	the	applicant’s	reasons	might	be. Men
	
went	to	court	as	many	as	seven	times	and	then	failed	to	get	exemption	and	were
	
subsequently	prosecuted	for	not	having	their	children	vaccinated. The	league	agitated	and	agitated	until	the	act	of	1907	was	passed	by	the	Liberal
	
government	which	came	into	office	after	the	election	of	1906,	during	which	the
	
anti-vaccinists	had	worked	strenuously	and	had	got	pledges	to	vote	for	the	repeal
	
of	compulsion	from	over	300	of	those	returned	to	Parliament. That	act	under	which	an	objector	had	to	make	a	statutory	declaration	of	his
	
objection	to	vaccination	before	the	baby	is	four	months	old,	has	resulted	in	the
	
exemption	of	nearly	five	million	children	in	England	and	Wales	under	sixteen
	
years	of	age. These	are	mainly	the	children	of	the	middle	and	working	classes,	as
	
we	call	them,	but	we	have	support	in	the	higher	ranks	of	society. The	duchess	of
	
Hamilton’s	seven	children	are	all	exempted	and	two	of	them	have	King	George
	
and	Queen	Mary	as	sponsors. Lady	Maud	Warrender,	who	also	moves	in	royal
	
circles,	paid	a	fine	sooner	than	have	her	son	vaccinated. Lady	Isabel	Margesson,
	
sister	of	the	Earl	of	Buckinghamshire,	is	a	member	of	the	league. Among	scientists	our	most	notable	supporters	were	Alfred	Russel	Wallace	and
	
Herbert	Spencer. We	have	fifteen	or	sixteen	registered	medical	men	as	vice	presidents	of	our
	
league	and	there	are	some	thirty	others	who	more	or	less	sympathize	with	our
	
work. That	the	number	is	not	more	is	easily	understood. Medical	students	in
	
England	do	not	study	the	vaccination	question. It	is	taken	for	granted	at	all	the
	
medical	schools	and	no	student	dare	question	what	he	is	taught. He	has	to	cram	a
	
vast	amount	of	book	knowledge	into	his	brain	and	he	has	neither	the	time	nor	the
	
inclination	to	study	any	subject	not	needed	for	his	examinations. When	he
	
qualifies	he	goes	into	general	practice	or	becomes	a	specialist,	but	as	the
	
majority	of	the	vaccinations	in	England	are	done	by	the	4,000	public	vaccinators,
	most	of	the	doctors	see	very	little	of	the	operation. They	do	not	realize	the	harm
	
done	by	it	and	their	minds	have	been	closed	up	when	they	were	students. Of	literary	men,	George	Bernard	Shaw	is	our	most	noted	supporter. Important	developments	are	in	sight	in	England. Early	this	year	the	government
	
appointed	a	committee	of	inquiry	into	vaccine	lymph. It	is	certain	that	the
	
present	glycerinated	calf	lymph	has	caused	deaths	from	"sleepy	sickness"	in
	
England,	two	London	professors	having	brought	to	the	notice	of	the	government
	
seven	of	such	cases	at	the	end	of	the	year	1922. At	the	Paris	Academy	of
	
Medicine	in	July,	1925,	doctors	discussed	deaths	from	this	disease	which	had
	
occurred	shortly	after	vaccination	in	Holland	and	other	European	countries. At
	
the	beginning	of	this	year	there	was	a	conference	at	The	Hague	under	the
	
auspices	of	the	health	committee	of	the	League	of	Nations,	which	discussed
	
many	matters	in	connection	with	smallpox,	vaccine	lymph,	etc.,	and	finally
	
decided	to	ask	each	country	represented	there	to	appoint	a	committee	to
	
investigate	these	matters. Smallpox	in	England	has	declined	almost	to	the	vanishing	point	and	the
	
recognized	dangers	of	vaccination	will	probably	induce	the	government	to	drop
	
compulsory	infant	vaccination	altogether	and	substitute	for	it	the	compulsory
	
vaccination	of	all	persons	who	have	been	in	contact	with	smallpox. This,	of
	
course,	we	shall	resist	with	all	our	might	so	far	as	our	friends	will	allow. In	answer	to	an	article	headed	"Vaccination	Wins	Again"	in	the	Detroit	Saturday
	
Night	Press,	Miss	Loat	asks:
	
1)	That	the	disease	which	is	being	diagnosed	as	smallpox	in	unvaccinated
	
persons	in	England	is	hardly	distinguishable	from	chickenpox,	the	absence	or
	
presence	of	vaccination	marks	being	the	fact	that	definitely	decides	the
	
diagnosis. This	has	been	admitted	by	English	medical	officers	of	health	and	the	Ministry	of
	
Health	has	twice	stated	in	answer	to	questions	in	Parliament	that	vaccination	is
	
one	factor	in	the	diagnosis	of	these	cases. 2)	That	as	in	those	districts	where	this	very	mild	disease	is	running	the	vast
	
majority	of	the	children	are	unvaccinated,	it	would	be	difficult	for	the	disease	to
	
find	a	child	who	had	been	vaccinated	in	infancy	to	attack. 3)	That	those	cases	which,	though	vaccinated	immediately	after	being	in	contact
	
with	this	alleged	smallpox,	subsequently	contract	it,	are	all	classified	as
	
unvaccinated. 4)	That	in	spite	of	these	official	attempts	to	make	out	a	case	for	vaccination,	the
	
fatality	rate	of	the	unvaccinated	cases	in	England	is	less	than	half	of	the
	
vaccinated	cases. 5)	That	the	English	Ministry	of	Health	omits	to	state	that	in	1872,	when	85%	of
	
the	infants	born	were	vaccinated,	there	were	19,000	deaths	from	smallpox	in
	
England	and	Wales. While	in	1925,	when	less	than	half	the	children	born	were
	
vaccinated,	there	were	only	6	deaths	from	that	disease. The	history	of	vaccination	and	smallpox	in	England	can	be	summed	up	in	these
	
words,	the	truth	of	which	is	apparent	to	any	unbiased	student	of	our	national
	
statistics:
	
	
"Much	vaccination,	little	sanitation,	much	smallpox;	little	vaccination,	improved
	
sanitation,	little	smallpox." The	children	of	England,	five	million	of	whom	are	unvaccinated,	were	never
	
healthier	than	they	are	today. The	people	have	shown	their	detestation	of
	
vaccination	and	neither	persuasion	nor	force	will	induce	them	to	submit	to	what
	
the	famous	Dr.	Charles	Creighton	called	"a	grotesque	superstition." OPEN	LETTER	TO	GOVERNOR	KNIGHT
	
447	Crane	Blvd.
548615196-Eleanor-McBean-Trung-Nguyen-The-Poisoned-Needle-Suppressed-Facts-About-Vaccination-2018-Update.txt
Summarize the following text section accurately and concisely. Maintain specific details and numerical information, and use anti-repetition mechanisms:

        Not	many	years	ago	the	‘big
	
bugs’	in	the	medico-scientific	field	had	the	effrontery	to	calmly	state,	in	their
	
public	meetings,	that	the	‘appendix’	served	no	useful	purpose	in	the	body	and	the
	
tonsils	were	the	remains	of	our	‘gills’—left	over	in	our	bodies	when	man
	
emerged	from	the	sea	as	a	land	animal. Now,	students	realize	that	the	appendix
	
helps	to	keep	the	cecum	on	the	safe	side	by	holding	the	putrefactive	bacteria,	in
	
that	blind	sewer,	at	a	safe	level	and	that	the	tonsils	play	important	parts	in	killing
	
disease	organisms	that	would	otherwise	get	into	the	lymphatic	circulatory
	
system. "Yet	in	many	quarters	the	yanking	out	of	tonsils	for	a	fee	and	the	chopping	out	of
	
the	appendix	for	the	doctor’s	wife’s	fur	coat	continue	unabated. Gall	bladder
	
operations	are	still	sending	unfortunates	to	the	insane	asylums	as	of	yore	and	the
	
so-called	‘fixing’	of	stomach	and	intestinal	ulcers	by	‘removing	a	section	of	the
	
anatomy’	with	a	knife,	is	still	considered	good	‘practice’. Yet	even	the	most
	
obstinate	medical	physician	and	surgeon	KNOWS	that	ulcers	are	caused	by	too
	
strong	stomach	chemicals,	digesting	the	mucous	membrane,	and	that	the	proper
	
treatment	is	merely	to	reduce	the	strength	of	such	digestive	chemicals. Smallpox
	
vaccine—which	has	spread	syphilis	throughout	the	civilized	world	is	still
	
‘obligatory’	in	many	parts	of	the	universe	and	the	Schick	vaccine—that	arch
	
killer	of	Japanese	babies	in	the	hands	of	our	army	‘brass	hat	doctors’—is	still
	
being	used	as	a	‘professional	fee	getter’	although	it	still	curtails	the	infant
	
population. "Altogether	,	the	situation	seems	to	be	getting	worse—not	better. And	the	Salk
	
vaccine—for	all	its	blatant	propaganda,	for	all	its	high	endorsement	by	the
	
Public	Health	Department	of	our	kindly	government—is	failing	dismally	just	as
	
Duon	H. Miller,	of	Coral	Gables,	Florida,	predicted	it	would	fail. "Let	us	look	again	at	this	rotten	laboratory	concoction—this	Salk	vaccine	made
	
from	the	diseased	kidney	of	a	tortured	monkey. If	you	will	recall,	the	proponents
	
of	this	polio	medicine	never	CLAIMED	that	it	would	PREVENT	POLIO. Those
	
gentlemen	of	the	dollar	sign	merely	said	that	it	would	PROBABLY	prevent	the
	
paralysis	which	followed	or	accompanied	the	usual	polio. They	KNEW	that
	
nothing	that	could	be	‘shot’	into	the	clean	bloodstreams	of	the	youngsters	would
	
lower	the	sugar	content. And	manifestly	it	was	the	excessive	sugar—taken	into
	
the	infant’s	body	in	the	summertime	in	the	shape	of	ice	cream,	cola	and	other
	
soft	drinks,	candy	and	like	sweets—that	BROUGHT	ON	POLIO. No	question	about	that. All	medical	books	show	that	polio	does	not	exist	in
	
those	countries	where	the	consumption	of	sugar—refined	sugar—is	less	than	90
	
pounds	per	person. "Well,	anyway,	the	American	people	were	sold	a	‘bill	of	goods’	by	those	stuff-
shirted	individuals	back	of	this	Salk	concoction. And	it	was	the	sainted	‘March
	
of	Dimes’	parasites	who	did	that	‘selling’. No	question	about	it—the	‘March	of
	
Dimes’	had	to	come	up	with	some	new	‘gadget’	to	keep	the	dimes	rolling	in	so
	
that	the	motley	array	of	individuals	on	that	expanded	payroll	might	still	receive
	their	lush	salaries	And	the	gist	of	the	whole	‘selling	campaign’	was	not	that	the
	
Salk	vaccine	would	CURE	POLIO	or	would	even	PREVENT	POLIO. But	it	was
	
emphasized	that	this	Salk	monkey	juice	WOULD	PREVENT	THE	PARALYSIS
	
WHICH	FOLLOWED	POLIO. "That	PREVENTION	OF	PARALYSIS	was	what	actually	‘sold’	the	American
	
people	on	this	Salk	concoction. Polio,	without	paralysis,	was	not	feared. The
	
reason	millions	of	parents	were	willing	to	‘take	a	chance’	with	their	children	and
	
toss	them	onto	the	table	of	‘medical	experimentation’—the	reason	they	were
	
willing	to	have	their	offspring’s	bloodstream	contaminated	by	this	Salk	filth—
was	in	the	hope	it	MIGHT	PREVENT	POLIO	PARALYSIS. "As	Al	Smith	would	have	said	‘Let	us	look	at	the	record. ’	Most	of	you	know	that
	
during	1955,	millions	upon	millions	of	little	American	children	had	their
	
bloodstreams	filled	with	this	Salk	vaccine. Some	got	one—some	got	two	and
	
some	even	get	three	‘shots’. So,	in	this	year	of	1956—if	this	monkey	juice	was
	
any	good	at	all—the	number	of	cases	of	polio	should	have	been	almost	wiped
	
out	and	PARALYSIS,	FOLLOWING	the	few	cases	of	polio	which	did	SLIP
	
THROUGH,	should	be	practically	nil. "Right	in	line	with	the	above	is	a	report,	issued	in	Washington,	D. C. on	May	11,
	
1956,	as	appeared	in	the	New	York	Times. ‘Through	1956	through	last	Saturday,	May	4th	(four	months	of	1956)	there	had
	
been	1,463	polio	cases,	broken	down	into	803	paralytic,	399	non-paralytic	and
	
261	UNSPECIFIED. In	1955—same	period	(four	months)	there	was	1,599
	
cases,	437	nonparalytic	and	459	unspecified. PARALYTIC	CASES	numbered
	
703. ’
	
"There	you	have	in	black	and	white	the	DEFINITE	RESULTS	of	this	Salk
	
preventative	paralysis	vaccine. Although	tens	of	thousands	of	children	received
	
the	Salk	trash	in	1955	which	should	have	PROTECTED	THEM	FROM
	
PARALYSIS—there	were	over	12%	MORE	PARALYSIS	CASES	in	1956	than
	
in	1955. Just	how	gullible	do	the	medical	authorities	believe	the	American
	
people	are. The	medical	men	should	know	that	the	average	layman	can	read
	
figures	and	make	comparisons. So	let	us	not	permit	these	medical	double	talkers
	
to	blind	us	further. What	is	the	good	of	CUTTING	DOWN	THE	POLIO	CASES
	
IF	MORE	OF	THOSE	WHO	ARE	STRICKEN	BECOME	PARALYZED. And
	
what	is	EVEN	MORE	dreadful	to	contemplate	is	the	thought	of	what	may	be	the
	aftermath	of	this	placing	in	a	child’s	bloodstream	of	this	rotten,	filthy	juice	from
	
the	diseased	kidney	of	a	dead	monkey. Vaccination	for	smallpox	spread	syphilis
	
throughout	the	world. And	we,	Naturopaths,	are	now	wondering—what	will	this
	
Salk	filth	conjure	up. " HEALTH	RESEARCH,	MOKELUMNE	HILL,	CALIFORNIA. Dear	Sirs:
	
May	I	congratulate	you	on	your	splendid	work. There	are	probably	many	moments	of	discouragement	when	you	ask	yourself,
	
"Is	it	worth	it	all. " It	is. It	is	only	through	public	enlightenment	that	an	end	can
	
be	made	to	the	abuses	of	the	drug	trust	and	the	medical-bund. Organizations	such	as	yours	are	capable	of	slowing	down	the	drug	and	vaccine
	
steamroller. If	you	were	not	hurting	them	or	if	they	did	not	fear	you,	they	would
	
not	attempt	to	persecute	you. My	personal	knowledge	of	the	medical	bund	is	of	an	intimate	nature. I	hold	the
	
B. Sc. ,	M. A. ,	and	Ph. D. degrees	from	New	York	University. I	did	graduate	work
	
on	a	grant	from	the	medical-bund	controlled	National	Foundation	for	Infantile
	
Paralysis. I	am	a	graduate	of	an	A. M.
The author is strongly opposed to the Salk vaccine, citing its ineffectiveness and potential harm to children.
What is the author's stance on the Salk vaccine?
The author is a doctor with a B.Sc., M.A., and Ph.D. degree from New York University and has experience in the medical field.
What is the author's profession?
The appendix helps to keep putrefactive bacteria at a safe level by holding them in a safe place.
What is the purpose of the appendix?
The author believes that the government should not be involved in medicine and that people should have the right to make their own decisions about their health.
What is the author's opinion on the role of the government in medicine?
The author believes that the government is controlled by powerful interests and that the medical profession is more concerned with protecting their interests than with the well-being of the public.
What is the author's view on the relationship between the government and the medical profession?