If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Greenberg and polio
Well, well. I just finished reading "The Probably Influence of Salk
Poliomyelitis Vaccine on Reported Poliomyelitis in North Carolina" by Bernard Greenberg and Charles Cameron (North Carolina Medical Journal. 1955. 16(9) 391-395.). This is the only publication from Greenberg on polio. His conclusions are this: Don't expect to see much of a decline in the number of polio cases in North Carolina for a couple of years using the Salk vaccine because we're waiting too long to vaccinate kids. His prediction for an average year (North Carolina was one of the hardest hit states with polio at the time): % Vaccinated Cases 0 640 25 553 50 476 75 398 100 321 At this time, kids were getting vaccinated in the 2nd grade, thus the majority of infections were in kids younger than 6, a rather large susceptible population. Of course, today we vaccinate and boost at much younger ages (starting at 2 months), thus reducing the size of the susceptible population. Thus, the incidence of polio declined to zero in the U. S. Anyone who suggests Dr. Greenberg was against polio vaccination isn't telling the truth. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Greenberg and polio
"Vaccine-man" wrote in message ... Well, well. I just finished reading "The Probably Influence of Salk Poliomyelitis Vaccine on Reported Poliomyelitis in North Carolina" by Bernard Greenberg and Charles Cameron (North Carolina Medical Journal. 1955. 16(9) 391-395.). This is the only publication from Greenberg on polio. His conclusions are this: Don't expect to see much of a decline in the number of polio cases in North Carolina for a couple of years using the Salk vaccine because we're waiting too long to vaccinate kids. His prediction for an average year (North Carolina was one of the hardest hit states with polio at the time): % Vaccinated Cases 0 640 25 553 50 476 75 398 100 321 At this time, kids were getting vaccinated in the 2nd grade, thus the majority of infections were in kids younger than 6, a rather large susceptible population. Of course, today we vaccinate and boost at much younger ages (starting at 2 months), thus reducing the size of the susceptible population. Thus, the incidence of polio declined to zero in the U. S. Anyone who suggests Dr. Greenberg was against polio vaccination isn't telling the truth. Well, I guess you're right in so far as Greenberg's views on the matter as of 1955. But his more sceptical views re polio vaccines were expressed ca 1960. Ability to change your views if the evidence demands it is a sign of an honest scientist. Yuri. Yuri Kuchinsky -=O=- http://www.globalserve.net/~yuku "There is a great deal of evidence to prove that immunisation of children does more harm than good." -- Dr J Anthony Morris, former Chief Vaccine Control Officer, FDA. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Greenberg and polio
"Yuri Kuchinsky" wrote in message ... "Vaccine-man" wrote in message ... Well, well. I just finished reading "The Probably Influence of Salk Poliomyelitis Vaccine on Reported Poliomyelitis in North Carolina" by Bernard Greenberg and Charles Cameron (North Carolina Medical Journal. 1955. 16(9) 391-395.). This is the only publication from Greenberg on polio. Also, I want to add that this is NOT the only publication from Greenberg on polio. As I posted already, his views were also published in the August, 1960, Illinois Medical Journal. "In May of 1960, Dr. Ratner chaired a panel discussion, at the 120th Annual Meeting of the Illinois Medical Society to review the increasing rise in paralytic polio in the U.S. The proceedings were reprinted in the August, 1960, Illinois Medical Journal which exposed the Salk vaccine as a frank and ineptly disguised fraud. One of the experts on the panel, statistician Dr. Bernard Greenberg, who went on to testify at Congressional hearings, revealed how data had been manipulated to hide the dangers and ineffectiveness of the vaccine from the pubic. Dr. Greenberg explained that the perceived overall reduction in polio cases was achieved by changing the criteria by which polio was diagnosed. (2)" Yuri. His conclusions are this: Don't expect to see much of a decline in the number of polio cases in North Carolina for a couple of years using the Salk vaccine because we're waiting too long to vaccinate kids. His prediction for an average year (North Carolina was one of the hardest hit states with polio at the time): % Vaccinated Cases 0 640 25 553 50 476 75 398 100 321 At this time, kids were getting vaccinated in the 2nd grade, thus the majority of infections were in kids younger than 6, a rather large susceptible population. Of course, today we vaccinate and boost at much younger ages (starting at 2 months), thus reducing the size of the susceptible population. Thus, the incidence of polio declined to zero in the U. S. Anyone who suggests Dr. Greenberg was against polio vaccination isn't telling the truth. Well, I guess you're right in so far as Greenberg's views on the matter as of 1955. But his more sceptical views re polio vaccines were expressed ca 1960. Ability to change your views if the evidence demands it is a sign of an honest scientist. Yuri. Yuri Kuchinsky -=O=- http://www.globalserve.net/~yuku "There is a great deal of evidence to prove that immunisation of children does more harm than good." -- Dr J Anthony Morris, former Chief Vaccine Control Officer, FDA. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Greenberg and polio
Vaccine-man wrote:
Well, well. I just finished reading "The Probably Influence of Salk Poliomyelitis Vaccine on Reported Poliomyelitis in North Carolina" by Bernard Greenberg and Charles Cameron (North Carolina Medical Journal. 1955. 16(9) 391-395.). This is the only publication from Greenberg on polio. His conclusions are this: Don't expect to see much of a decline in the number of polio cases in North Carolina for a couple of years using the Salk vaccine because we're waiting too long to vaccinate kids. His prediction for an average year (North Carolina was one of the hardest hit states with polio at the time): % Vaccinated Cases 0 640 25 553 50 476 75 398 100 321 At this time, kids were getting vaccinated in the 2nd grade, thus the majority of infections were in kids younger than 6, a rather large susceptible population. Of course, today we vaccinate and boost at much younger ages (starting at 2 months), thus reducing the size of the susceptible population. Thus, the incidence of polio declined to zero in the U. S. Anyone who suggests Dr. Greenberg was against polio vaccination isn't telling the truth. Are you suggesting that anti-vaccination liars are liars? News flash: UN announces that grass is green and the sky is blue. -- Peter Bowditch aa #2243 The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles Australian Council Against Health Fraud http://www.acahf.org.au Australian Skeptics http://www.skeptics.com.au To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Greenberg and polio
"Yuri Kuchinsky" wrote:
"Vaccine-man" wrote in message ... Well, well. I just finished reading "The Probably Influence of Salk Poliomyelitis Vaccine on Reported Poliomyelitis in North Carolina" by Bernard Greenberg and Charles Cameron (North Carolina Medical Journal. 1955. 16(9) 391-395.). This is the only publication from Greenberg on polio. His conclusions are this: Don't expect to see much of a decline in the number of polio cases in North Carolina for a couple of years using the Salk vaccine because we're waiting too long to vaccinate kids. His prediction for an average year (North Carolina was one of the hardest hit states with polio at the time): % Vaccinated Cases 0 640 25 553 50 476 75 398 100 321 At this time, kids were getting vaccinated in the 2nd grade, thus the majority of infections were in kids younger than 6, a rather large susceptible population. Of course, today we vaccinate and boost at much younger ages (starting at 2 months), thus reducing the size of the susceptible population. Thus, the incidence of polio declined to zero in the U. S. Anyone who suggests Dr. Greenberg was against polio vaccination isn't telling the truth. Well, I guess you're right in so far as Greenberg's views on the matter as of 1955. But his more sceptical views re polio vaccines were expressed ca 1960. Ability to change your views if the evidence demands it is a sign of an honest scientist. Citation from 1960 please. -- Peter Bowditch aa #2243 The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles Australian Council Against Health Fraud http://www.acahf.org.au Australian Skeptics http://www.skeptics.com.au To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Greenberg and polio
"Yuri Kuchinsky" wrote in message
... "Yuri Kuchinsky" wrote in message ... "Vaccine-man" wrote in message ... Well, well. I just finished reading "The Probably Influence of Salk Poliomyelitis Vaccine on Reported Poliomyelitis in North Carolina" by Bernard Greenberg and Charles Cameron (North Carolina Medical Journal. 1955. 16(9) 391-395.). This is the only publication from Greenberg on polio. Also, I want to add that this is NOT the only publication from Greenberg on polio. As I posted already, his views were also published in the August, 1960, Illinois Medical Journal. "In May of 1960, Dr. Ratner chaired a panel discussion, at the 120th Annual Meeting of the Illinois Medical Society to review the increasing rise in paralytic polio in the U.S. The proceedings were reprinted in the August, 1960, Illinois Medical Journal which exposed the Salk vaccine as a frank and ineptly disguised fraud. One of the experts on the panel, statistician Dr. Bernard Greenberg, who went on to testify at Congressional hearings, revealed how data had been manipulated to hide the dangers and ineffectiveness of the vaccine from the pubic. Dr. Greenberg explained that the perceived overall reduction in polio cases was achieved by changing the criteria by which polio was diagnosed. (2)" This is not a direct publication by Greenberg and what would its relevance be even if this was a correct account of his opinion at the time? It is absolutely obvious to anyone working in any capacity within medicine that the epidemics of paralysis in children of the polio days have stopped. It is even obvious to the many "alternative" practitioners who try to find reasons other than vaccinations for the phenomenon. PM |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Greenberg and polio
On Dec 12, 6:37 pm, "Yuri Kuchinsky" wrote:
"Yuri Kuchinsky" wrote in message ... "Vaccine-man" wrote in message ... Well, well. I just finished reading "The Probably Influence of Salk Poliomyelitis Vaccine on Reported Poliomyelitis in North Carolina" by Bernard Greenberg and Charles Cameron (North Carolina Medical Journal. 1955. 16(9) 391-395.). This is the only publication from Greenberg on polio. Also, I want to add that this is NOT the only publication from Greenberg on polio. As I posted already, his views were also published in the August, 1960, Illinois Medical Journal. "In May of 1960, Dr. Ratner chaired a panel discussion, at the 120th Annual Meeting of the Illinois Medical Society to review the increasing rise in paralytic polio in the U.S. The proceedings were reprinted in the August, 1960, Illinois Medical Journal which exposed the Salk vaccine as a frank and ineptly disguised fraud. One of the experts on the panel, statistician Dr. Bernard Greenberg, who went on to testify at Congressional hearings, revealed how data had been manipulated to hide the dangers and ineffectiveness of the vaccine from the pubic. Dr. Greenberg explained that the perceived overall reduction in polio cases was achieved by changing the criteria by which polio was diagnosed. (2)" Yuri. His conclusions are this: Don't expect to see much of a decline in the number of polio cases in North Carolina for a couple of years using the Salk vaccine because we're waiting too long to vaccinate kids. His prediction for an average year (North Carolina was one of the hardest hit states with polio at the time): % Vaccinated Cases 0 640 25 553 50 476 75 398 100 321 At this time, kids were getting vaccinated in the 2nd grade, thus the majority of infections were in kids younger than 6, a rather large susceptible population. Of course, today we vaccinate and boost at much younger ages (starting at 2 months), thus reducing the size of the susceptible population. Thus, the incidence of polio declined to zero in the U. S. Anyone who suggests Dr. Greenberg was against polio vaccination isn't telling the truth. Well, I guess you're right in so far as Greenberg's views on the matter as of 1955. But his more sceptical views re polio vaccines were expressed ca 1960. Ability to change your views if the evidence demands it is a sign of an honest scientist. Yuri. Yuri Kuchinsky -=O=-http://www.globalserve.net/~yuku "There is a great deal of evidence to prove that immunisation of children does more harm than good." -- Dr J Anthony Morris, former Chief Vaccine Control Officer, FDA. Is there an online site to access the Illinois Medical Journal? Thanks Citizen Jimserac |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Greenberg and polio
Citizen Jimserac wrote:
On Dec 12, 6:37 pm, "Yuri Kuchinsky" wrote: "Yuri Kuchinsky" wrote in message ... "Vaccine-man" wrote in message ... Well, well. I just finished reading "The Probably Influence of Salk Poliomyelitis Vaccine on Reported Poliomyelitis in North Carolina" by Bernard Greenberg and Charles Cameron (North Carolina Medical Journal. 1955. 16(9) 391-395.). This is the only publication from Greenberg on polio. Also, I want to add that this is NOT the only publication from Greenberg on polio. As I posted already, his views were also published in the August, 1960, Illinois Medical Journal. "In May of 1960, Dr. Ratner chaired a panel discussion, at the 120th Annual Meeting of the Illinois Medical Society to review the increasing rise in paralytic polio in the U.S. The proceedings were reprinted in the August, 1960, Illinois Medical Journal which exposed the Salk vaccine as a frank and ineptly disguised fraud. One of the experts on the panel, statistician Dr. Bernard Greenberg, who went on to testify at Congressional hearings, revealed how data had been manipulated to hide the dangers and ineffectiveness of the vaccine from the pubic. Dr. Greenberg explained that the perceived overall reduction in polio cases was achieved by changing the criteria by which polio was diagnosed. (2)" Yuri. His conclusions are this: Don't expect to see much of a decline in the number of polio cases in North Carolina for a couple of years using the Salk vaccine because we're waiting too long to vaccinate kids. His prediction for an average year (North Carolina was one of the hardest hit states with polio at the time): % Vaccinated Cases 0 640 25 553 50 476 75 398 100 321 At this time, kids were getting vaccinated in the 2nd grade, thus the majority of infections were in kids younger than 6, a rather large susceptible population. Of course, today we vaccinate and boost at much younger ages (starting at 2 months), thus reducing the size of the susceptible population. Thus, the incidence of polio declined to zero in the U. S. Anyone who suggests Dr. Greenberg was against polio vaccination isn't telling the truth. Well, I guess you're right in so far as Greenberg's views on the matter as of 1955. But his more sceptical views re polio vaccines were expressed ca 1960. Ability to change your views if the evidence demands it is a sign of an honest scientist. Yuri. Yuri Kuchinsky -=O=-http://www.globalserve.net/~yuku "There is a great deal of evidence to prove that immunisation of children does more harm than good." -- Dr J Anthony Morris, former Chief Vaccine Control Officer, FDA. Is there an online site to access the Illinois Medical Journal? Highly doubtful. Living child hating anti-vac liar sociopaths mainly use "sources" than cannot be verified. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Greenberg and polio
On Dec 12, 4:02 pm, "Yuri Kuchinsky" wrote:
Well, I guess you're right in so far as Greenberg's views on the matter as of 1955. But his more sceptical views re polio vaccines were expressed ca 1960. Ability to change your views if the evidence demands it is a sign of an honest scientist. Yuri. Sure, I'd be happy to evaluate your evidence. Will you post the *original* citation information so that I can find it? You know, document name, pages, year, volume, issue, title - all that stuff that honest scientists disseminate. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Greenberg and polio
On Dec 12, 4:37 pm, "Yuri Kuchinsky" wrote:
Also, I want to add that this is NOT the only publication from Greenberg on polio. It is the only publication in a peer-reviewed journal. As I posted already, his views were also published in the August, 1960, Illinois Medical Journal. "In May of 1960, Dr. Ratner chaired a panel discussion, at the 120th Annual Meeting of the Illinois Medical Society to review the increasing rise in paralytic polio in the U.S. The proceedings were reprinted in the August, 1960, Illinois Medical Journal which exposed the Salk vaccine as a frank and ineptly disguised fraud. One of the experts on the panel, statistician Dr. Bernard Greenberg, who went on to testify at Congressional hearings, revealed how data had been manipulated to hide the dangers and ineffectiveness of the vaccine from the pubic. Dr. Greenberg explained that the perceived overall reduction in polio cases was achieved by changing the criteria by which polio was diagnosed. (2)" Yuri. Are you now telling us that these words in the above paragraph are what's in the IMJ? You don't want me coming back here and show you've perpetuated intellectual fraud, do you? As before, I need page, volume and issue info to obtain this document. Please provide it since you're citing it. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
origins of polio | [email protected] | Kids Health | 202 | December 22nd 07 10:46 PM |
Four polio cases in Minnesota (10-14-05) | Caledonia | Kids Health | 15 | October 19th 05 05:39 AM |
History of polio | Jeff | Kids Health | 1 | May 24th 05 01:36 AM |
Polio threat | Mark | Kids Health | 2 | August 25th 04 12:25 PM |
Polio vaccine genocide in Uganda | john | Kids Health | 56 | August 13th 03 07:56 PM |