CORRESPONDENCE. 



VACCINATION. 



Sir, — The letter of " U " in Natural Science for October gives one very- 

 striking exception to the rule laid clown in Natural Science for September, that 

 " no level-headed person with any capacity for weighing evidence doubts that 

 vaccination, efficiently performed, affords an almost absolute protection against 

 small-pox for a term of five to ten years according to the natural susceptibility 

 of the individual." May I be allowed to pillory a few more? 



Dr. William Gayton, giving evidence before the recent Vaccination Commis- 

 sion, in answer to Question 1755, expressed the opinion that "primary vaccina- 

 tion is a very fleeting protection indeed. As to the time that primary vaccina- 

 tion lasts I do not know, but I think it is a very short time." 



Dr. R. A. Birdwood, whose experience of small-pox covers 12,000 cases, in 

 answer to Question 31,191, stated that vaccination cannot be relied upon as an 

 absolute protection up to any age whatever. 



In addition to those who are not anti-vaccinationists, be it noted there are 

 no less than four M.D.'s on the general Committee of the Anti- Vaccination 

 League, one of whom is Dr. Charles Creighton, author of the article 

 " Vaccination " in the "Encyclopaedia Britannica" (9th eel.), "The Theory and 

 Practice of Vaccino-Syphilis," and other works. 



Another is Dr. W S. Tebb, whose recent work on "A Century of Vaccina- 

 tion" is full of facts marshalled in a masterly manner. 



How many M.D.'s there may be as private members I have no means of 

 knowing, but the recent addition of Dr. W. J. Collins, one of the Royal Com- 

 missioners and a signatory of the minority report, was recently published, and 

 very naturally made much of. 



Dr. Alfred Russel Wallace is another of those exceptions, every one of whom 

 conscientiously objects in a greater or lesser degree to vaccination, and I for 

 one hesitate to say that they do so "in strict proportion to " their " ignorance 

 and inability to weigh evidence." 



I quite agree that " were the money necessary to secure compulsory vaccina- 

 tion spent in a reasonable system of education of the masses as to the value of 

 vaccination, it is possible that a larger percentage of vaccinations might be 

 secured than under the present system," but it is very improbable. 



One good would accrue from such a course, viz. the impossibility of gaining 

 entrance into a scientific magazine of high standing, such as Natural Science, of 

 a sentence like this — " The recognition of the fact that vaccinia is merely attenuated 

 small-$>ox — proved again and again — only brings vaccination into line with 

 what we know of other protective inoculations." — Yours truly, E. G. B. 



[We have inserted the above from a sense of fair-play, but Natural Science 

 is not the place for carrying on a discussion on the subject, and we must draw 

 the line after alluding to two points : — (1) The duration of the protection 

 afforded by primary vaccination is not to be settled by giving the opinion of 



79 



