You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: FaceBook removes all doubt: Vaccines are dangerous!
No, you argued that increased hygiene did all the heavy lifting, as medical treatment would have involved vaccines and medicines that were developed after the microscope that convinced people that germs were a "real" thing combined with the fact they could now offer medicines and vaccines that kept the germs at bay. Hygiene was the natural course of action hundreds of years before the invent of the microscope, medicines and vaccines, no amount of natural immunity would have kept many people from dying prior to that.
Clearly I am not talking about vaccines, and am talking about medications otherwise under the unbrella term 'improved medical treatment'. And, amongst the primary mechanisms was indeed hygiene. Prior to the Civil War, doctors didn't wash their hands between patients much.
This is centuries after the invention of the microscope by Leeuwvanhoek in the 17th Century.
Of course you didn't read the link I gave you. It's only a hypothetical guess on your part that doctors didn't wash their hands in between patience, the evidence in the link suggest otherwise, hygiene was always viewed as a defense mechanism, basically the only one they had back in those times. Along with your analogy of not vaccines just talking about medication....the link discusses that also, the voo-doo remedies, the snake oil salesmen type jive....actually medicine and vaccines proven to work didn't occur until the identification and isolation of the germs causing them, which goes back to my comment that this is how we know that chart can be disproved....as the chart indicates dates that there was no scientific way to identify the exact source why a lot of people died back then. You can argue for/against vaccines all day long, that isn't the issue in this chart debates credibility, the issue is there was no scientific way this chart can be held to be true or accurate during certain time frames on it.