Skip to content

Letter to the Editor: Canine Distemper Virus

A letter to the editor from Stewart Godfrey
letter to the editor graphic stock
Letter to the editor. (Shutterstock)

Richard Dowson wrote a very interesting welcome article about the Canine Distemper Virus being the cause of MS and possibly several horrid diseases.

Because of the nature of my work, I was made aware of the Canine Distemper Virus being a possibility (a strong one) as the cause of MS; now we know it is; Hallelujah!

But Richard says under the subtitled “The Old Way of Vaccine Development”… 

“In very simplistic terms, Dr. Edward Jenner, known for developing the Smallpox Vaccine, found a survivor of smallpox who donated antigen rich blood (serum) that was diluted, purified and injected into another person giving that person antibodies, making them immune to smallpox.  Of course it is more complex that that, but you get the idea.”
 
…this is quite a different story than the one I was taught.  I was taught the cowpox version (see excerpt from the Encyclopedia Britannica) below p. 133 Macropedia Vol 10 15th edition.  
 
“The story of the great breakthrough is well-known. In May, 1796 Jenner found a young dairymaid, Sarah Nelmes, who had fresh cowpox lesions on her finger. On May 14, using matter from Sarah’s lesions, he inoculated an eight-year-old boy, James Phipps, who promptly developed a slight fever and a low grade lesion. On July 1 Jenner inoculated the boy again, this time with smallpox matter. No disease developed; protection was complete. 

“Jenner, in 1978, having added further cases, published privately a slender book entitled An Inquiry into the Causes and Effects of the Variolae Vaccinae, a Disease…Know by the Name of Cow Pox.   

“The reaction to the publication was not immediately favourable. Jenner went to London seeking volunteers for vaccination but, in a stay of three months, was not successful. In London, inoculation became popularized through the activities of others, particularly the surgeon Henry Cline, to whom Jenner had given some of the inoculant, and doctors George Pearson and William Woodville. Difficulties arose, some of them quite unpleasant: Pearson tried to take credit away from Jenner; and Woodville, a physician in a smallpox hospital, contaminated the cowpox matter with smallpox virus.

“But the procedure rapidly proved its value, and Jenner became intensely active, promoting the cause of vaccination. The procedure spread rapidly to the Continent, then to America, and soon was carried around the world.  

“Complications were many. Vaccination seemed simple, but the vast number of persons who practiced it did not necessarily follow the procedure that Jenner had recommended, and deliberate or unconscious innovations often impaired the effectiveness. Pure cowpox vaccine was not always easy to obtain, not was it easy to preserve or transmit. Furthermore, the biological factors that produce immunity were not yet understood; much information had to be gathered, and a great many mistakes made before a fully effective procedure could be developed, even on an empirical basis.

“Despite errors and occasional chicanery, the process of vaccination spread rapidly and the death rate from smallpox plunged. Jenner, although he received world-wide recognition and many honours, made no attempt to enrich himself through his discovery and actually devoted so much time to the cause of vaccination that his private practice and his personal affairs suffered severely. In 1802, Parliament voted him a sum of 10,000 pounds and in 1806 a further sum of 20,000 pounds.  

“Jenner not only received honours bur also aroused opposition and found himself subjected to attacks and calumny.”

My question: Has new historical research proven the milkmaid, cowpox version wrong?  
 
Kind regards, 
Stewart Godfrey   

The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author, and do not necessarily reflect the position of this publication.  

push icon
Be the first to read breaking stories. Enable push notifications on your device. Disable anytime.
No thanks