5 ms·

He didn't infect him, he variolated him. Variolation normally causes a very mild form of smallpox -- but results in a person becoming immune to the disease. Var

by jkabrg 8y ago

He didn't infect him, he variolated him. Variolation normally causes a very mild form of smallpox -- but results in a person becoming immune to the disease. Variolation is the predecessor of vaccination.

craftyguy 8y ago
Really? The article says the boy was infected with smallpox after being exposed to cowpox to test whether or not exposure to cowpox would help: > > He tested this by infecting the boy with smallpox and no illness occurred.
- jkabrg 8y ago
  The wording is misleading. For the following reasons: - Variolation was common in England at the time. - Wikipedia says that he *inoculated* the boy with smallpox. That means variolation.
  - sg0 8y ago
    Indeed it was misleading. "The basis for vaccination began in 1796 when an English doctor named Edward Jenner observed that milkmaids who had gotten cowpox did not show any symptoms of smallpox after variolation. The first experiment to test this theory involved milkmaid Sarah Nelmes and James Phipps, the 9 year-old son of Jenner’s gardener. Dr. Jenner took material from a cowpox sore on Nelmes’ hand and inoculated it into Phipps’ arm. Months later, Jenner exposed Phipps a number of times to variola virus, but Phipps never developed smallpox." from https://www.cdc.gov/smallpox/history/history.html https://www.cdc.gov/smallpox/history/history.html
steve19 8y ago
Well the history of variolation in the West is no walk in the park. It was tested on prisoners who were then exposed to smallpox and told if they survived they would go free! https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Variolation https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Variolation
- therein 8y ago
  > It was tested on prisoners who were then exposed to smallpox and told if they survived they would go free! I am not saying it is an good situation but I have a feeling a lot of people who are in prison for life with no chance of parole would probably be interested in such an offer.

by jkabrg 8y ago

craftyguy 8y ago

Really? The article says the boy was infected with smallpox after being exposed to cowpox to test whether or not exposure to cowpox would help: > > He tested this by infecting the boy with smallpox and no illness occurred.

jkabrg 8y ago
The wording is misleading. For the following reasons: - Variolation was common in England at the time. - Wikipedia says that he *inoculated* the boy with smallpox. That means variolation.
- sg0 8y ago
  Indeed it was misleading. "The basis for vaccination began in 1796 when an English doctor named Edward Jenner observed that milkmaids who had gotten cowpox did not show any symptoms of smallpox after variolation. The first experiment to test this theory involved milkmaid Sarah Nelmes and James Phipps, the 9 year-old son of Jenner’s gardener. Dr. Jenner took material from a cowpox sore on Nelmes’ hand and inoculated it into Phipps’ arm. Months later, Jenner exposed Phipps a number of times to variola virus, but Phipps never developed smallpox." from https://www.cdc.gov/smallpox/history/history.html https://www.cdc.gov/smallpox/history/history.html

steve19 8y ago

Well the history of variolation in the West is no walk in the park. It was tested on prisoners who were then exposed to smallpox and told if they survived they would go free! https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Variolation https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Variolation

therein 8y ago
> It was tested on prisoners who were then exposed to smallpox and told if they survived they would go free! I am not saying it is an good situation but I have a feeling a lot of people who are in prison for life with no chance of parole would probably be interested in such an offer.