ALAN writes:

This interesting bit of history is from The Medical Mafia: How to get out of it alive and take back our health and wealth  by Guylaine Lanctot, M.D.:

“In 1905, the Philippines had a mortality rate of 10% due to smallpox. After a massive vaccination program, it reached epidemic proportions, killing 25% of the population, by now vaccinated. Despite this, the authorities stepped up the vaccinations. In 1918, the worst epidemic killed 54% of the people there, at a time when 95% of the population had been vaccinated. Manila, the capital, where everyone had been vaccinated or revaccinated, was the hardest hit with 65%. The Island of Mindanao, where the inhabitants had refused to be vaccinated, was the least hit. Only 11%. Despite this evidence, anti-smallpox vaccinations continued and, in 1966, the W.H.O. launched a world campaign which would last 10 years, only to be abandoned because it proved to be ineffective…

“….It is hardly astonishing that, in every major vaccination campaign, one finds the same tangled web. Government, the military, Saint W.H.O., financiers, researchers, laboratories, universities, the CIA, and the World Bank….”

[The Medical Mafia: How to get out of it alive and take back our health and wealth, Miami, FL: Here’s The Key, Inc., 1995, pp. 117, 131; emphasis added.]

— Comments —

Patrick O’Brien writes:

I love your website, but I think an exaggerating writer managed to get something printed in it.

“In 1905, the Philippines had a mortality rate of 10% due to smallpox. After a massive vaccination program, it reached epidemic proportions, killing 25% of the population, by now vaccinated. Despite this, the authorities stepped up the vaccinations. In 1918, the worst epidemic killed 54% of the people there, at a time when 95% of the population had been vaccinated.

The Philippines had about 7.6 million people in 1903. By 1920 there were 10.6 million. No way 54% of the population was killed in 1918.

Laura writes:

Hmm, that doesn’t look right, does it.

Thanks so much! Will check that figure.

Zeno writes:

A brief reply to the previous commenter. Although the original quote doesn’t make it clear, the 65% and 54% number does not refer to the population as a whole, but just to those who had the disease. So it was a 54% “case mortality” (about 60 thousand people of a total of 120 thousand), not of the total population, which would be absurd. The following link explains:

“(…).we can only conclude that between 1918-1919 there were 112,549 cases of smallpox notified, with 60,855 deaths. Systematic (mass) vaccination started in 1905, and since its introduction case mortality increased alarmingly. Their own records comment that “The mortality is hardly explainable.”—Dr Kalokerinos (Second Thoughts on Disease by Kalokerinos & Dettman)

More info here (but I can’t vouch for the accuracy of the data nor the validity of the claims, it’s the first thing I found about it):

Smallpox Vaccination in the Philippines 1905-1920

Is it not, therefore, rather strange, Mr. President, that vaccination should be reported as so utterly harmless in the distant Philippines, where we can not easily get at the records, when we know it is so deadly in the nearby England and America, where the accessible records show that it causes, frequently, more deaths than smallpox, as I have already proved?

Laura writes:

Of course, that makes sense.

Thank you!

Please follow and like us: