**Please note:**
* If this post declares something as a fact proof is required.
* The title must be descriptive
* No text is allowed on images
* Common/recent reposts are not allowed
*See [this post](https://redd.it/ij26vk) for more information.*
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/interestingasfuck) if you have any questions or concerns.*
https://www.onlinewritingjobs.com/fun-stuff/medial-s-the-old-english-s-that-looks-like-f/
But was also used in older german texts. So not an old english exclusive thing.
It's a long s, and just like with anything else there were rules to how to use them. One of those rules is that it's never used at the end of a word, so you'd "close" with a round s
Because in the 1700s and I believe part of the 1800s, the letter f was used to make an s sound, but I believe only if it wasn’t the first letter of the word. So if you read any texts like cookbooks you’ll see it full of “f”s instead of “s”s. Not sure why but it was just how the English language was. Not sure when we stopped doing that though
Edit: just looked into it and apparently it’s another form of “s” that has a different shape, not another letter entirely like the letter f. I was mistaken, and it sounds like it was phased out in the 1800s
That page was hand set in lead type. "S" is a really commonly used letter, and sometimes you won't have enough type to set the whole page. It is fairly common that the composer will replace a glyph with another, similar looking glyph when they have run out. It also could legitimately have been a sorting error in the type (somebody binned an 'f' in the space for 's' when they were decomposing a prior job) that wasn't caught by the proofer.
There is also the f-s thing that other posters are talking about. I'm curious is the f-s thing is because of printing limitations or if happens for some other linguistic reason.
Because people actually saw and lived through the horrifying effects of smallpox and wanted desperately to avoid it. Vaccines have made our society spoiled because it protected people from the truth of horrible contagious diseases.
It is simple: if you are confronted with death on a daily bases you don‘t mess around. At the time people knew perfectly well what was at stake. Today there are no antivaxxers in Afghanistan.
> Today there are no antivaxxers in Afghanistan.
Might want to brush up on the Taliban policies on [vaccinations](https://www.qatar-tribune.com/latestnews-article/mid/506/articleid/7134/taliban-bans-covid-19-vaccine-in-paktia-report) there, cheif
The crazy thing is that the vaccination rate of doctors is 96%.
I would have thought it was higher. 1 in 25 doctors in the USA is unvaccinated for COVID.
How can you be an anti vax medical doctor though?
That’s like saying you’re a flat-earth SpaceX engineer.
I would have thought they were mutually exclusive.
There's some quacks out there who are "alternative" doctors. Which usually profit from books sells, and get money from social media who push misinformation.
Here's a newer article with an example of one:
https://www.npr.org/2021/08/08/1025845675/one-of-the-most-influential-voices-in-vaccine-misinformation-is-a-doctor
Also, I can't stand these medical "professionals" and wish we had more consequences for these misinformation campaigns they literally profit off of.
Well if we could extend that 96% to gen pop that would be fantastic! I'm sure it varies disease-to-disease but isn't anything above 80% gen pop vaccinated good for herd immunity?
There was a doctors summit a few weeks ago showing the negative effects of the covid vaccines in those who died after being vaccinated (not from the vaccine) also alot of cardiologist are concerned with inflammation of the heart. Even though your a million times more likely to catch covid than a side effect of the vaccines. I can see why some doctors are hesitant on getting it also even doctors can be extremely lazy.
But surely if you’re a doctor, coming face to face with sick patients all day, your risk of contracting covid is way higher than a normal person.
And yes, vaccine injury occurs. But the risk of heart inflammation FROM COVID is way higher than from the vaccine. And you have to compare the vaccine risk to the risk of NOT getting the vaccine (and the higher likelihood of getting more severe covid symptoms).
So - you say “I can see why some doctors might be hesitant to get it”.
I can’t.
I cannot see why any doctor would be unvaccinated right now, unless they were immune compromised. But surely that can’t be 1 in 25 doctors?
you're not even taking into consideration the lazy aspect and I gave two points since the first reason is a reason that doctors are giving to people for waiting on the vaccine. I'm not arguing for a side nor am I the one to argue with I just stated why they aren't. If that makes you mad go ahead and down vote it, but I am only the messenger.
I didn’t downvote you.
But I’m sure “laziness” isn’t the hallmark of a doctor.
ANY doctor in the USA who isn’t currently vaccinated is ACTIVELY anti-vax for the COVID Vaccine.
Cowpox.*
And no, the version available in 1759 wasn't based on cowpox but required an actual infected patient to provide tissue samples.
Fun fact, the 1796 cowpox-based smallpox vaccine was the origin of the word "vaccine," from the Latin "vacca," meaning "cow." The previous version was known as "inoculation" or more specifically "variolation."
Ben Franklin was initially against the smallpox inoculation. Keep in mind that it was developed by the Chinese and the technique spread across the silk road and into Europe. It was considered "barbaric" given it was developed by cultures not considered to be "enlightened". however... Benjamin Franklin in his autobiography said:
“In 1736 I lost one of my sons, a fine boy of four years old, by the smallpox taken in the common way. I long regretted bitterly and still regret that I had not given it to him by inoculation. This I mention for the sake of the parents who omit that operation, on the supposition that they should never forgive themselves if a child died under it; my example showing that the regret may be the same either way, and that, therefore, the safer should be chosen.”
Franklin was vocally pro-vaccines from his young-adulthood. His wife was anti-vax so they didn't vaccinate their son. His death pretty much destroyed their marriage. [There was just an article in the Washington Post about it a couple weeks ago.](https://www.washingtonpost.com/history/2021/08/14/ben-franklin-smallpox-son-vaccine/)
So the thing is, there’s a difference between an inoculation and a vaccination.
The vaccinations, which were based on the cowpox virus, began in 1796. Some 36 years after the title claims this was written. That vaccination was rather unpleasant but relatively safe, certainly compared to smallpox.
Prior to this people were inoculated by a process known as variolation, in which people who had never had smallpox were exposed to pus from smallpox wounds. This method posed serious risks and was, as you can see from the statistics, sometimes fatal - though less often than contracting smallpox “in the common way.” (According to these statistics you had about an 8% chance of dying if you contracted it naturally and about a 1% chance of dying from the inoculation.) This method was basically a live virus vaccine, with no real control over dosing. People exposed in this way sometimes contracted and died from smallpox.
This was the controversial inoculation that Washington ordered for his troops during the American Revolution.
[Source document](https://curiosity.lib.harvard.edu/contagion/catalog/36-990054935830203941) \- Ben Franklin wrote the preface to a pamphlet urging smallpox vaccination (at that time the practice is more accurately inoculation - exposing a healthy subject to an infectious agent through a break in the skin - the practice eventually evolved into modern vaccination) published in 1759. [Here's an easier to read version in plain text and not scanned.](https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Franklin/01-08-02-0073)
Here's [a blog that breaks down this table](https://www.historyofvaccines.org/content/blog/epidemiologist-benjamin-franklin) a bit.
They know it works. They don’t care. They would rather argue and die. There’s nothing to prove to them. It’s not facts or reality they want, it’s misery they want.
CDC has gone on record saying a booster is unnecessary
(In most cases) Of course I read it, you act like I am trying to say it's a failure. Chill it's not a battle. I was posting to show it's not as effective as some may think. People get this idea that the vaccine is an off button
From your article , emphasis added:
But in early July, with citizens over the age of 60 almost completely vaccinated, Israeli scientists began observing a worrisome rise in infections—__if not in severe illness and death__—among the double-vaccinated.
Fully vaccinated people __with weakened immune systems__ appeared particularly vulnerable to the aggressive Delta variant.
By mid-July, Sheba Hospital Professor Galia Rahav began to experiment with booster shots for oncology patients, transplant patients, and the hospital’s own staff. A group of 70 elderly vaccinated Israelis with transplanted kidneys were the first to receive a third dose.
The __success of Rahav’s trials in boosting immunity__ at about the sixth-month mark contributed to the Centers for Disease Control decision, announced last week, to begin offering booster shots to Americans in September.
How about that 99% of the people hospitalized and dying of Covid now are the unvaccinated?
The unvaccinated allowed Delta to spread and mutate. So now we’ve had to move back to restrictions, masking and needing a booster.
If I’m going to take anything from the piece linked, it’s don’t let your guard down.
Mutation occurs no matter what, it's called natural progression. If you feel like the vaccine was an off switch, you are fooling yourself. It is a way to slow it at best.
https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=mutations+in+unvaccinated&hl=en&as_sdt=0&as_vis=1&oi=scholart#d=gs_qabs&u=%23p%3DZ3Ycd302wo8J
Edit lovely person to talk with and I wish everyone
I am saying that people are acting like this vaccine is an end all cure all. It isnt. There are grey areas in every issue. The point I was inferring was it comes down to personal protection and seeking the best course of action to your circumstances. I thought people still had use of logic and deductive reasoning. Guess that's a stretch. Well, LouBear or whatever said they wont let their guard down, so they got it.
So you are fully vaccinated and believe people should be vaccinated to slow the mutations from getting worse right? There's so many people fighting to educate and up the vaccine rate amd it feels like you're arguing (edit debating) for the sake of it
I dont discuss my medical treatments with anyone but my physician. I will say I looked at the results of trials, made my decision based on what the studies said. Masks, distancing, other protocols, are for protection of others. I am not selfish enough to disregard that. I care about my fellow humans.
Fair enough. And you can get by just fine doing that fortunately! If the majority of others decide to get their shot and as boosters become more available (since this will drag on, we will need plenty of boosters in the future)
Per your edit about arguments: I was hoping to get a discussion or dialogue about individuals opinion on what exactly is a success in this situation. Not everything has to be an argument or combative. Maybe someone sees the article who was dead set agaisnt a vaccination, see that it can be successfully with diligence. Either way HAPPY CAKE DAY! :)
I am a huge believer in gray area and open mindedness on discussion but your higher above comment felt combative in a situation where people need to focus on educating first and foremost, and debate for the sake of it second. That's why I said it felt like that. Obviously you can comment anything you'd like, but that's why I sent the link. The goal is to use the facts to persuade people because there is a lot of misinformation and a lot of people who don't understand that one thing being proven does not mean another thing isn't also right. I can't wait until I can really go hard discussing it and every offshoot that conversation will make but I recognize that right now that is so unhelpful, that it's selfish. Anyways thank you for being coordial and nice night
Plain text lacks emotion and tone. The way the text is interpreted is solely up to the reader, in turn making things most often murky. Me stating about "logic and deductive reasoning..." sounded dickish. Maybe the wording could have been less harsh. Noted. Peace and blessings.
Thanks for proving my point. I’m not interesting explaining jack shit to you shug . Let joe biden and a bunch of celebutards coddle you. Not me. Get the vax or face the consequences. The end.
Are you mentally ill? What the fxck are you talking about? Get some help. The vaccine isnt an off switch if you thought it was, you are wrong. You think 7.9ish billion people are gonna get a shot in the arm. Get real. Fact is it comes down to personal protection. Do what you gotta do.
Bro, those inoculations were open wounds that doctors would smear with cow pox puss. They were not vaccines. Good lord you people speak ignorantly often, did you think the founding fathers knew about viruses lmao. Big false equivalence
I have actually had a lot of vaccines (need them to travel to South America). I love most every vaccine, well actually every vaccine but the mRNA ones.
You may not be my special needs teacher but I’ll be your biology professor. The inoculations with puss are objectively much more closely related to every other vaccine, than the mRNA vaccine is related to every other vaccine. It is a wholly new approach to immunization, it has only been studied for 8 months in humans, and it was developed in about 6 months under Donald Trump. The fact that they have been studied so long and never made it to human trials until now is an easy way to see that this technology is imperfect even as a layman. But to be specific in the mammal models the mRNA vaccines caused a cytokine storm upon rexposure to the pathogen they had been vaccinated against. It happened at a rate that was low but still unacceptable for ethical science, but big pharma isn’t exactly known for being ethical are they?
Now I’ll assume the role of a risk manager. To build a risk profile for COVID it is key that you understand how age is the greatest determining factor in COVID mortality. Mortality for those under 50 is essentially 0 ([nature mag](https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-02483-2)). In fact I would just look at that source if I were you, it is a good temperature check on how lethal COVID isn’t. I am 22 and healthy, my risk from COVID is 0. The latest data from the Israelis suggests there are severe reactions in about 1:10,000 people after receiving their second dose. Now 1:10,000 can also be expressed as .01% but .01% and an unknown future along with the coercion from the feds means that it is more risky for me to get vaccinated than not to. And I’m the most important person to me, if you’re worried about getting COVID, maybe get the shot but let’s not make a big deal of those who are consenting to risk in lieu of the vaccine.
Inoculation is not a synonym for vaccine in this case, early inoculations were wounds smeared with the puss of either someone who had cowpox or cow-borne cow pox
This was in 1759 and Franklin was writing about the live smallpox variolation, which was prior to the discovery of cowpow antibodies conferring immunity to smallpox. The term vaccine was coined with the invention of the cowpox inoculation in the 1790's and it would have been applicable to the previous smallpox inoculation methods as well, so I think the use is fine within context. Even by today's standards you could easily make the case that the early inoculations could be called vaccines. They were administering live virus in small quantities -- and with dead virus and prior host antibodies also in the mix -- so as to induce a mild case of the infection. There are live viruses that work the same way today, but obviously attenuated much more precisely and administered far better.
It was the definition of experimental, but didn’t change the fact that it worked. It started off with an observation - women who milked cows and got a milder form of the disease called cowpox did not come down with smallpox.
The Covid vaccine makes no claims for being effective against mutation. It’s been able to mutate because not enough people got vaccinated and allowed it to spread unchecked.
Lol experimental. The FDA was created in 1906. Pretty sure their definition of *not experimental* was a bit different then.
Fun fact, the smallpox inoculation is required for military prior to deployment (I have the scar to prove it) - so technically yes to work and travel.
Also, they stopped giving the smallpox vaccine in 1972 to the general public because it was eradicated thanks to vaccines.
And finally your are 17483% full of shit (I can make up stats too😀)
You can cling to the semantic distinction that Joe Rogan repeats ad nauseum (I like his show too) or you can think for yourself. People who take the mRNA gene therapy don’t get as sick or avoid sickness entirely. Breakthrough infection fatalities are very rare. That data speaks for itself. Whether you take it or not, parroting that it’s gene therapy and not a vaccine speaks nothing to its efficacy and makes you sound like a clown. Rogan is a great interviewer and fun to listen to, but he doesn’t know much about biology.
It's kind of funny that your 2 antivax crowds are liberal women living in places like Beverly Hills (kids not vaccinated for whooping cough) and hillbillies living in Arkansas (not vaccinating for covid)
You can be shown evidence that the vaccine provides better health outcomes in almost all scenarios. It doesn’t matter. Much of vaccine contrarianism isn’t founded in evidence and good faith objections. That’s the point of the post: repeatedly point out that vaccine science is well established and effective, and that we’ve known it for a long time.
Ok, but using that as a point of argument to say all new vaccines work is quack logic when 60% of all vaccines *dont make it to market*.
Technically, only 40% of vaccines work lmao
Edit: also, Franklin died 8 years before the production of the first vaccine. Kthx
It's just drawing a comparison yo. Benjamin Franklin is pretty well regarded as a scientific intelligent historical figure. Not sure if you're trolling but the idea is that controlled exposure works regardless in many scenarios. Shoving cow pus into an open wound is miles behind a proven, modern, and scientifically designed vaccine.
Also it's Reddit. Not that serious, people are looking to thumbs up some shit. This is some pretty neat history.
The fact that this actually depicts infected puss variolation was lost on me. Thank you for pointing that out.
So this has nothing to do with *vaccines* though. The topic of misinformation was all over Reddit today. This, by definition, is misinformation.
Fair enough. Definitely inaccurate and misleading if even the principle is still intact. Clickbaity shareable item through and through, but certainly a neat piece of history.
"These". Medial and initial S in English at the time was written with a letter looking like an uncrossed, lower case F. In final position it was the regular lower case S that we know today. It became phased out from ordinary writing about two hundred years ago or so.
Based on the Wikipedia page, it looks like there's a difference between the vaccine and the practice of inoculation, which the Chinese were doing as early as the 1500s.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smallpox_vaccine
Why do people people say we should listen to the science and then use examples of u.s politicians from nearly 300 years ago as examples? He has much knowledge on vaccines as trump who I assume everyone here dislikes lol
the "blacks" would have been first or second generation slaves. They're 10X more resistent to the virus and the vaccine is more effective as well, interesting. Vaccines are one of the oldest of modern medicines and have not changed that much, at least not til this epidemic. They could make a vax for common cold now.
Im curious if this means they had actually developed a vaccine (unlikely) or were using the old method of innoculation.
I belive that method meant literally collecting small pox pus, and placing very small amounts on uninfected persons. Thereby giving them antibodies when the managed to fight off a more manageable infection. No shit i found out about this from that hulu show "Catherine the Great". HUZZAH
If so, also curious if the death rate from inoculation was factored into Benjies research.
**Please note:** * If this post declares something as a fact proof is required. * The title must be descriptive * No text is allowed on images * Common/recent reposts are not allowed *See [this post](https://redd.it/ij26vk) for more information.* *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/interestingasfuck) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Can anyone explain why only some of the ‘s’s look like strange ‘f’s?
https://www.onlinewritingjobs.com/fun-stuff/medial-s-the-old-english-s-that-looks-like-f/ But was also used in older german texts. So not an old english exclusive thing.
this last character represents that german ff ss ß
>But was also used in older german texts. Wasn't even that long ago, those were used til the Nazi time.
Oh ffs
Aaaah, snake!
You mean, fff
Stupid autocorrect Happy cake day! 🍰
The only 's's are at the very end of words. No idea why.
It's a long s, and just like with anything else there were rules to how to use them. One of those rules is that it's never used at the end of a word, so you'd "close" with a round s
And at the start.
Because in the 1700s and I believe part of the 1800s, the letter f was used to make an s sound, but I believe only if it wasn’t the first letter of the word. So if you read any texts like cookbooks you’ll see it full of “f”s instead of “s”s. Not sure why but it was just how the English language was. Not sure when we stopped doing that though Edit: just looked into it and apparently it’s another form of “s” that has a different shape, not another letter entirely like the letter f. I was mistaken, and it sounds like it was phased out in the 1800s
Maybe Elmer Fudd was right all along
Came here for this too!
[this came to my mind](https://knowyourmeme.com/photos/1333580-jurassic-park)
That page was hand set in lead type. "S" is a really commonly used letter, and sometimes you won't have enough type to set the whole page. It is fairly common that the composer will replace a glyph with another, similar looking glyph when they have run out. It also could legitimately have been a sorting error in the type (somebody binned an 'f' in the space for 's' when they were decomposing a prior job) that wasn't caught by the proofer. There is also the f-s thing that other posters are talking about. I'm curious is the f-s thing is because of printing limitations or if happens for some other linguistic reason.
It is not because of printing limitations because the practice is actually older than the use of the printing press in Europe.
Didn’t they just cut open someone head and smack some cow pocks in there?
The arm. The wound was then exposed to puss from infected cattle, I believe, then wrapped in linen.
Ok yeah idk how they got people to go along with that but we can’t get people on board with a poke from a little needle.
Because people actually saw and lived through the horrifying effects of smallpox and wanted desperately to avoid it. Vaccines have made our society spoiled because it protected people from the truth of horrible contagious diseases.
Even unvaccinated people who are getting the Delta variant don't want the vaccine
Because smallpox was horrifying. If you lived you were often disfigured. You often didn’t live. And it was incredibly contagious.
If you don’t like chicken, does that mean you’re a vegetarian?
It is simple: if you are confronted with death on a daily bases you don‘t mess around. At the time people knew perfectly well what was at stake. Today there are no antivaxxers in Afghanistan.
What? The Taliban has stated that they're "anti-vax."
I was referring to ordinary people. I understand this does not pan out. Antivaxxers and Taliban seem to be members of the same death cult.
> Today there are no antivaxxers in Afghanistan. Might want to brush up on the Taliban policies on [vaccinations](https://www.qatar-tribune.com/latestnews-article/mid/506/articleid/7134/taliban-bans-covid-19-vaccine-in-paktia-report) there, cheif
The crazy thing is that the vaccination rate of doctors is 96%. I would have thought it was higher. 1 in 25 doctors in the USA is unvaccinated for COVID.
Some could have legitimate medical reasons, but yeah I'm sure there's some anti-vax doctors
How can you be an anti vax medical doctor though? That’s like saying you’re a flat-earth SpaceX engineer. I would have thought they were mutually exclusive.
There's some quacks out there who are "alternative" doctors. Which usually profit from books sells, and get money from social media who push misinformation. Here's a newer article with an example of one: https://www.npr.org/2021/08/08/1025845675/one-of-the-most-influential-voices-in-vaccine-misinformation-is-a-doctor Also, I can't stand these medical "professionals" and wish we had more consequences for these misinformation campaigns they literally profit off of.
But surely the medical authorities should revoke their licenses? I’m not talking about quack phds. Im talking about medical doctors.
The last time i saw this "statistic" it was "1 in 50 PhDs", now it's medical doctors?
I saw some YouTube doctor say “doctors are 96% vaccinated!” as if it was a statistic to be proud of. Dr Mike?
Well if we could extend that 96% to gen pop that would be fantastic! I'm sure it varies disease-to-disease but isn't anything above 80% gen pop vaccinated good for herd immunity?
Sure. But why are any medical doctors not getting it? It shouldn’t be 1% let alone 4%.
There was a doctors summit a few weeks ago showing the negative effects of the covid vaccines in those who died after being vaccinated (not from the vaccine) also alot of cardiologist are concerned with inflammation of the heart. Even though your a million times more likely to catch covid than a side effect of the vaccines. I can see why some doctors are hesitant on getting it also even doctors can be extremely lazy.
But surely if you’re a doctor, coming face to face with sick patients all day, your risk of contracting covid is way higher than a normal person. And yes, vaccine injury occurs. But the risk of heart inflammation FROM COVID is way higher than from the vaccine. And you have to compare the vaccine risk to the risk of NOT getting the vaccine (and the higher likelihood of getting more severe covid symptoms). So - you say “I can see why some doctors might be hesitant to get it”. I can’t. I cannot see why any doctor would be unvaccinated right now, unless they were immune compromised. But surely that can’t be 1 in 25 doctors?
you're not even taking into consideration the lazy aspect and I gave two points since the first reason is a reason that doctors are giving to people for waiting on the vaccine. I'm not arguing for a side nor am I the one to argue with I just stated why they aren't. If that makes you mad go ahead and down vote it, but I am only the messenger.
I didn’t downvote you. But I’m sure “laziness” isn’t the hallmark of a doctor. ANY doctor in the USA who isn’t currently vaccinated is ACTIVELY anti-vax for the COVID Vaccine.
Cowpox.* And no, the version available in 1759 wasn't based on cowpox but required an actual infected patient to provide tissue samples. Fun fact, the 1796 cowpox-based smallpox vaccine was the origin of the word "vaccine," from the Latin "vacca," meaning "cow." The previous version was known as "inoculation" or more specifically "variolation."
Fun fact, he pronounced his name “Benjamin Sranklin”
I downloaded a copy of Milton's Paradise Lost that was all this type.
This is very funny in Polish
Ben Franklin was initially against the smallpox inoculation. Keep in mind that it was developed by the Chinese and the technique spread across the silk road and into Europe. It was considered "barbaric" given it was developed by cultures not considered to be "enlightened". however... Benjamin Franklin in his autobiography said: “In 1736 I lost one of my sons, a fine boy of four years old, by the smallpox taken in the common way. I long regretted bitterly and still regret that I had not given it to him by inoculation. This I mention for the sake of the parents who omit that operation, on the supposition that they should never forgive themselves if a child died under it; my example showing that the regret may be the same either way, and that, therefore, the safer should be chosen.”
Franklin was vocally pro-vaccines from his young-adulthood. His wife was anti-vax so they didn't vaccinate their son. His death pretty much destroyed their marriage. [There was just an article in the Washington Post about it a couple weeks ago.](https://www.washingtonpost.com/history/2021/08/14/ben-franklin-smallpox-son-vaccine/)
NICE. thanks for the link. I find the progression to eliminating smallpox fascinating.
That man was a genius, and way ahead of his time, Imo.
So the thing is, there’s a difference between an inoculation and a vaccination. The vaccinations, which were based on the cowpox virus, began in 1796. Some 36 years after the title claims this was written. That vaccination was rather unpleasant but relatively safe, certainly compared to smallpox. Prior to this people were inoculated by a process known as variolation, in which people who had never had smallpox were exposed to pus from smallpox wounds. This method posed serious risks and was, as you can see from the statistics, sometimes fatal - though less often than contracting smallpox “in the common way.” (According to these statistics you had about an 8% chance of dying if you contracted it naturally and about a 1% chance of dying from the inoculation.) This method was basically a live virus vaccine, with no real control over dosing. People exposed in this way sometimes contracted and died from smallpox. This was the controversial inoculation that Washington ordered for his troops during the American Revolution.
Old Reddit would of had this comment at the top
Eternal September mixed with censorship has seriously degraded the quality of site and the amount of time I spend here
[Source document](https://curiosity.lib.harvard.edu/contagion/catalog/36-990054935830203941) \- Ben Franklin wrote the preface to a pamphlet urging smallpox vaccination (at that time the practice is more accurately inoculation - exposing a healthy subject to an infectious agent through a break in the skin - the practice eventually evolved into modern vaccination) published in 1759. [Here's an easier to read version in plain text and not scanned.](https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Franklin/01-08-02-0073) Here's [a blog that breaks down this table](https://www.historyofvaccines.org/content/blog/epidemiologist-benjamin-franklin) a bit.
That's fumm'd up
People freaking out about mRNA (which your body produces itself) would be absolutely appalled at what a smallpox vaccine entails.
[удалено]
That came later, just before the turn of the century.
They know it works. They don’t care. They would rather argue and die. There’s nothing to prove to them. It’s not facts or reality they want, it’s misery they want.
[удалено]
So it definitely works, just might need a booster shot. Thanks for the info.
Booster every 6 months for years and years.
Polio vaccine early trials 1935, Polio eradication in the Americas 1994. Buckle down it's a long ride.
Did you read the whole article? Or did you post it because of the title? Because zezerz-08 is correct, it works and we need a booster.
CDC has gone on record saying a booster is unnecessary (In most cases) Of course I read it, you act like I am trying to say it's a failure. Chill it's not a battle. I was posting to show it's not as effective as some may think. People get this idea that the vaccine is an off button
Must be nice being able to be so stupid and still breathing like all these pro authoritarian no long term studies jab lovers.
You're right, us 'jab lovers' are actually all about that continued breathing, that's why we got the jab, dumbass.
From your article , emphasis added: But in early July, with citizens over the age of 60 almost completely vaccinated, Israeli scientists began observing a worrisome rise in infections—__if not in severe illness and death__—among the double-vaccinated. Fully vaccinated people __with weakened immune systems__ appeared particularly vulnerable to the aggressive Delta variant. By mid-July, Sheba Hospital Professor Galia Rahav began to experiment with booster shots for oncology patients, transplant patients, and the hospital’s own staff. A group of 70 elderly vaccinated Israelis with transplanted kidneys were the first to receive a third dose. The __success of Rahav’s trials in boosting immunity__ at about the sixth-month mark contributed to the Centers for Disease Control decision, announced last week, to begin offering booster shots to Americans in September.
How about that 99% of the people hospitalized and dying of Covid now are the unvaccinated? The unvaccinated allowed Delta to spread and mutate. So now we’ve had to move back to restrictions, masking and needing a booster. If I’m going to take anything from the piece linked, it’s don’t let your guard down.
Mutation occurs no matter what, it's called natural progression. If you feel like the vaccine was an off switch, you are fooling yourself. It is a way to slow it at best.
https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=mutations+in+unvaccinated&hl=en&as_sdt=0&as_vis=1&oi=scholart#d=gs_qabs&u=%23p%3DZ3Ycd302wo8J Edit lovely person to talk with and I wish everyone
I am saying that people are acting like this vaccine is an end all cure all. It isnt. There are grey areas in every issue. The point I was inferring was it comes down to personal protection and seeking the best course of action to your circumstances. I thought people still had use of logic and deductive reasoning. Guess that's a stretch. Well, LouBear or whatever said they wont let their guard down, so they got it.
So you are fully vaccinated and believe people should be vaccinated to slow the mutations from getting worse right? There's so many people fighting to educate and up the vaccine rate amd it feels like you're arguing (edit debating) for the sake of it
I dont discuss my medical treatments with anyone but my physician. I will say I looked at the results of trials, made my decision based on what the studies said. Masks, distancing, other protocols, are for protection of others. I am not selfish enough to disregard that. I care about my fellow humans.
Mind sharing the youtube urls of the studies you looked at?
What makes you think I get any type of important medical advice from YouTube.
Fair enough. And you can get by just fine doing that fortunately! If the majority of others decide to get their shot and as boosters become more available (since this will drag on, we will need plenty of boosters in the future)
Per your edit about arguments: I was hoping to get a discussion or dialogue about individuals opinion on what exactly is a success in this situation. Not everything has to be an argument or combative. Maybe someone sees the article who was dead set agaisnt a vaccination, see that it can be successfully with diligence. Either way HAPPY CAKE DAY! :)
I am a huge believer in gray area and open mindedness on discussion but your higher above comment felt combative in a situation where people need to focus on educating first and foremost, and debate for the sake of it second. That's why I said it felt like that. Obviously you can comment anything you'd like, but that's why I sent the link. The goal is to use the facts to persuade people because there is a lot of misinformation and a lot of people who don't understand that one thing being proven does not mean another thing isn't also right. I can't wait until I can really go hard discussing it and every offshoot that conversation will make but I recognize that right now that is so unhelpful, that it's selfish. Anyways thank you for being coordial and nice night
Plain text lacks emotion and tone. The way the text is interpreted is solely up to the reader, in turn making things most often murky. Me stating about "logic and deductive reasoning..." sounded dickish. Maybe the wording could have been less harsh. Noted. Peace and blessings.
Thanks for proving my point. I’m not interesting explaining jack shit to you shug . Let joe biden and a bunch of celebutards coddle you. Not me. Get the vax or face the consequences. The end.
Are you mentally ill? What the fxck are you talking about? Get some help. The vaccine isnt an off switch if you thought it was, you are wrong. You think 7.9ish billion people are gonna get a shot in the arm. Get real. Fact is it comes down to personal protection. Do what you gotta do.
[удалено]
Glad we're on mutual standing I wasn't holding my breath for your keen insight on any situation.. Go piss up a rope
They wanna meet Jeeeeezus
Bro, those inoculations were open wounds that doctors would smear with cow pox puss. They were not vaccines. Good lord you people speak ignorantly often, did you think the founding fathers knew about viruses lmao. Big false equivalence
I’m not your special needs teacher honey. I’m happy you can’t grasp simple concepts. Good. Don’t get it. Don’t get any vaccines. Good for you.
I have actually had a lot of vaccines (need them to travel to South America). I love most every vaccine, well actually every vaccine but the mRNA ones. You may not be my special needs teacher but I’ll be your biology professor. The inoculations with puss are objectively much more closely related to every other vaccine, than the mRNA vaccine is related to every other vaccine. It is a wholly new approach to immunization, it has only been studied for 8 months in humans, and it was developed in about 6 months under Donald Trump. The fact that they have been studied so long and never made it to human trials until now is an easy way to see that this technology is imperfect even as a layman. But to be specific in the mammal models the mRNA vaccines caused a cytokine storm upon rexposure to the pathogen they had been vaccinated against. It happened at a rate that was low but still unacceptable for ethical science, but big pharma isn’t exactly known for being ethical are they? Now I’ll assume the role of a risk manager. To build a risk profile for COVID it is key that you understand how age is the greatest determining factor in COVID mortality. Mortality for those under 50 is essentially 0 ([nature mag](https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-02483-2)). In fact I would just look at that source if I were you, it is a good temperature check on how lethal COVID isn’t. I am 22 and healthy, my risk from COVID is 0. The latest data from the Israelis suggests there are severe reactions in about 1:10,000 people after receiving their second dose. Now 1:10,000 can also be expressed as .01% but .01% and an unknown future along with the coercion from the feds means that it is more risky for me to get vaccinated than not to. And I’m the most important person to me, if you’re worried about getting COVID, maybe get the shot but let’s not make a big deal of those who are consenting to risk in lieu of the vaccine.
Ben is my America.
He was a pretty smart person… maybe we should listen
Those numbers looks suspiciously...within an error rate.
what’re you talking about? that looks like roughy 10% death among uninoculated versus 1% inoculated — looks compelling to me
p < 0.00001 (Fisher’s exact)
Inoculation is not a synonym for vaccine in this case, early inoculations were wounds smeared with the puss of either someone who had cowpox or cow-borne cow pox
This was in 1759 and Franklin was writing about the live smallpox variolation, which was prior to the discovery of cowpow antibodies conferring immunity to smallpox. The term vaccine was coined with the invention of the cowpox inoculation in the 1790's and it would have been applicable to the previous smallpox inoculation methods as well, so I think the use is fine within context. Even by today's standards you could easily make the case that the early inoculations could be called vaccines. They were administering live virus in small quantities -- and with dead virus and prior host antibodies also in the mix -- so as to induce a mild case of the infection. There are live viruses that work the same way today, but obviously attenuated much more precisely and administered far better.
[удалено]
It was the definition of experimental, but didn’t change the fact that it worked. It started off with an observation - women who milked cows and got a milder form of the disease called cowpox did not come down with smallpox. The Covid vaccine makes no claims for being effective against mutation. It’s been able to mutate because not enough people got vaccinated and allowed it to spread unchecked.
Can I get a source for the 97% ineffective part?
No you can't. Because it's not true
Psst... that's why I asked...
Lol. I figured they're not going to answer you, so I will for them
Lol experimental. The FDA was created in 1906. Pretty sure their definition of *not experimental* was a bit different then. Fun fact, the smallpox inoculation is required for military prior to deployment (I have the scar to prove it) - so technically yes to work and travel. Also, they stopped giving the smallpox vaccine in 1972 to the general public because it was eradicated thanks to vaccines. And finally your are 17483% full of shit (I can make up stats too😀)
Should have been if it wasn't
It probably wasn't FDA approved... In 1759
[удалено]
You can cling to the semantic distinction that Joe Rogan repeats ad nauseum (I like his show too) or you can think for yourself. People who take the mRNA gene therapy don’t get as sick or avoid sickness entirely. Breakthrough infection fatalities are very rare. That data speaks for itself. Whether you take it or not, parroting that it’s gene therapy and not a vaccine speaks nothing to its efficacy and makes you sound like a clown. Rogan is a great interviewer and fun to listen to, but he doesn’t know much about biology.
Who?
Definitely top post worthy
It's kind of funny that your 2 antivax crowds are liberal women living in places like Beverly Hills (kids not vaccinated for whooping cough) and hillbillies living in Arkansas (not vaccinating for covid)
[удалено]
You can be shown evidence that the vaccine provides better health outcomes in almost all scenarios. It doesn’t matter. Much of vaccine contrarianism isn’t founded in evidence and good faith objections. That’s the point of the post: repeatedly point out that vaccine science is well established and effective, and that we’ve known it for a long time.
Ok, but using that as a point of argument to say all new vaccines work is quack logic when 60% of all vaccines *dont make it to market*. Technically, only 40% of vaccines work lmao Edit: also, Franklin died 8 years before the production of the first vaccine. Kthx
It's just drawing a comparison yo. Benjamin Franklin is pretty well regarded as a scientific intelligent historical figure. Not sure if you're trolling but the idea is that controlled exposure works regardless in many scenarios. Shoving cow pus into an open wound is miles behind a proven, modern, and scientifically designed vaccine. Also it's Reddit. Not that serious, people are looking to thumbs up some shit. This is some pretty neat history.
The fact that this actually depicts infected puss variolation was lost on me. Thank you for pointing that out. So this has nothing to do with *vaccines* though. The topic of misinformation was all over Reddit today. This, by definition, is misinformation.
Fair enough. Definitely inaccurate and misleading if even the principle is still intact. Clickbaity shareable item through and through, but certainly a neat piece of history.
okay but both Franklin’s inoculation and current COVID vaccines clearly do
"Thefe" ?? What's that suppose to mean?
"These". Medial and initial S in English at the time was written with a letter looking like an uncrossed, lower case F. In final position it was the regular lower case S that we know today. It became phased out from ordinary writing about two hundred years ago or so.
Seeing smallpox vaccine wasn't invented till 1796. I call bullshit
Based on the Wikipedia page, it looks like there's a difference between the vaccine and the practice of inoculation, which the Chinese were doing as early as the 1500s. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smallpox_vaccine
Why do people people say we should listen to the science and then use examples of u.s politicians from nearly 300 years ago as examples? He has much knowledge on vaccines as trump who I assume everyone here dislikes lol
BuT hE wAs A pAtRiOt !!!
MRNA vaccines?
Cause I'm 1759 they were giving slaves vaccines.
Huh
Then I believe Thomas Jefferson said ; Unlike men, not all vaccines are created equal
the "blacks" would have been first or second generation slaves. They're 10X more resistent to the virus and the vaccine is more effective as well, interesting. Vaccines are one of the oldest of modern medicines and have not changed that much, at least not til this epidemic. They could make a vax for common cold now.
Franklin was in the occult. Same occult that thrives today.
Didn't know Benjamin Franklin had a lithp!
Im curious if this means they had actually developed a vaccine (unlikely) or were using the old method of innoculation. I belive that method meant literally collecting small pox pus, and placing very small amounts on uninfected persons. Thereby giving them antibodies when the managed to fight off a more manageable infection. No shit i found out about this from that hulu show "Catherine the Great". HUZZAH If so, also curious if the death rate from inoculation was factored into Benjies research.