Averros may find this of particular interest… The Last King of America: The Misunderstood Reign of George III (Andrew Roberts):
On 20 August 1782, the King and Queen were devastated to lose their youngest son, ‘dear little Alfred’, who died at Windsor Castle shortly before his second birthday. He had been taken to Deal by the royal governess Lady Charlotte Finch in the hope that he would recover from a fever through fresh sea air and bathing, but to no avail. The Court did not go into formal mourning as Alfred was not fourteen, but the royal couple were utterly grief-stricken. The Queen gave Finch an amethyst and pearl locket, and a lock of blond hair from ‘my dear little Angel Alfred’. She wrote to her brother Charles two days after Alfred’s death, ‘I am very grateful to Providence, that out of a family of fourteen children, it has never struck us except in this one instance, and so I must submit myself without a murmur.’ The cause was probably too high a dosage of the smallpox inoculation. The King and Queen were staunch advocates of this treatment, which was spearheaded by Edward Jenner, although they believed that Providence still played a large part in medicine.
When Edward Jenner finally perfected his vaccination technique in the mid-1790s, the King knighted him and became patron of the Jennerian Society which advanced the practice. In his enlightened way he did not allow personal tragedy to affect his rational appreciation of the great benefits of science.
If the U.S. had not traitorously rebelled, Americans might have funded a lot more scientific research during the 19th century.
Early in 1751, Frederick and Augusta settled the twelve-year-old George and eleven-year-old Edward at Savile House, adjoining Leicester House. It was the Hanoverian practice to give princes their own establishments early, and Savile House, built in the 1680s, was to become George’s London home for the next nine years. His mini-Court there consisted of a governor, preceptor (responsible for teaching), sub-governor, sub-preceptor and treasurer, with part-time teachers for languages, fencing, dancing and riding brought in from outside. He studied algebra, geometry and trigonometry. He was the first British monarch to study science, being taught basic physics and chemistry by Scott. He was receiving a good, all-round, enlightened education.
(But maybe not, since the British never taxed anyone in North America to fund government operations in England. Any taxes raised in the 13 colonies were spent in the 13 colonies. On the third hand, a British-governed North America led by a scientifically educated king might have funded local research labs.)
And we might have been spared the partisan politics that are often decried.
Contrary to the Whig imperative of minimizing royal power, The Idea of a Patriot King argued that the role of a constitutionally limited hereditary monarchy was important. Bolingbroke fully accepted that such seventeenth-century notions as the Divine Right of Kings had ‘no foundation in fact or reason’, and he believed ‘a limited monarchy the best of governments’. The limits on the power of the Crown, he maintained, should be ‘carried as far as is necessary to secure the liberties of the people’ and enough to protect the people against an arrogant (by which he meant Old Whig) aristocracy. Bolingbroke’s patriot king would revere the constitution, regard his prerogatives as a sacred trust, ‘espouse no party’ and ‘govern like the common father of his people’. A key message of the book was that government by party inevitably resulted in a factionalism disastrous to the state. ‘Party is a political evil,’ Bolingbroke wrote, ‘and faction is the worst of all parties. The king will aim at ruling a united nation, and in order to govern wisely and successfully he will put himself at the head of his people,’ so that he can deliver them ‘tranquillity, wealth, power and fame’.
Circling back to the vaccine… the situation is not directly comparable, of course. George III and Queen Charlotte were trying to vaccinated their child against a disease that regularly killed children.
2 thoughts on “A young child killed by a new vaccine”
Sebastian Rushworth interviewed Christine Stabell Benn about her work on childhood vaccination. Unfortunately the observed effects are not all good. Some highlights from the interview:
08:45 “For some vaccines … there’s a higher mortality in those who have been vaccinated”
11:00 “Live, attenuated vaccines that mimic a natural infection … have beneficial, non-specific effects”
“In contrast, the non-live vaccines, where you have … the dead disease organism or products or parts of the disease organism, there you see the negative non-specific effects. And those two types of vaccines are actually quite profoundly different…”
21:05 “The common thing for the non-live vaccines is that you give them into the muscle which is, technically speaking, a quite stupid place because … the immune system is not present in the muscle, it’s not where you’re supposed to meet your pathogens, they come in via your mucosa”
29:33 “If the vaccination program was altered … using the same vaccines just in a different order [i.e. live after non-live]… could reduce global child mortality by one million every year”
The Future is Female but maybe not quite as much as its proponents would like:
36:55 “The negative effects are seen primarily with the girls”
On covid vaccines (which are the “non-live” type):
39:55 “The current system for testing vaccines is not sufficient.”
46:50 “I find it appalling that the control group was vaccinated.”
…not only smallpox killed children, the vaccination against smallpox actually works. I’m vaccinated against it, by the way, still have two vaccination marks on my shoulder.
I’m not “anti-vaxx”, I’m anti-bullshit. And pretty much everything emanating from MSM and governments about COVID-19 is total bullshit.
Comments are closed.