Mrs Helen Goates of Bolivar, Missouri was a strong, healthy woman with no skin trouble or chronic disease when she was persuaded, during a vaccination drive, to submit to vaccination. Almost immediately, after the injection, an inflamed swelling started to develop around the vaccination. It continued to increase in size and intensity until it covered her entire arm and hand. After a period of time it spread over her back and breast as is shown in the photograph.

She was treated by more than a dozen doctors and cancer specialists but the condition grew steadily worse until death relieved her of her agony. Before her death she requested that a photograph be taken of the cancer in order that others might see the results of vaccination and be warned, in time against this ever present danger of vaccine poisoning.

The cancer does not always start immediately. It usually takes months or years for the poisons to degenerate enough tissue for a cancer to form.

Benjamin F. Olevine of Altoona, Pennsylvania, was vaccinated when in good health. Two months later a sarcomatous (tumorous) growth began to develop where the vaccination sore had not healed. The growth reached enormous proportions, as may be seen from the photograph, and caused intense pain and untold suffering, not, only in the arm but throughout the entire body. No cure was possible and his misery was relieved only by death.

(Photo from VACCINATION AND THE MEDICAL PROFESSION) Case XXV

Charles Higgens, of New York, shows photographs of five other fatal cases of post-vaccinal lock-jaw in his well documented book "The Horrors of Vaccination. (Pub. 1920) Records of 30 other fatal cases of this disease in New York, were published by Mr. James A. Loyster, of New York, whose son died of infantile paralysis (cerebral) as a result of vaccination. (The account of this case is given on page 33 of VACCINATION AT WORK, published by the National Anti-Vaccination-League.

When syphilis results from vaccination, it is the usual claim of the doctors, that the mother must surely have syphilis and certainly communicated it to the child. In Wales when 4,000 infants were found to be syphilitic after their vaccinations, all the parents were examined by the doctors in an effort to lay the blame on them, but the parents were found to be free from syphilis.

In the case of the Cheeseman baby, the same cowardly accusations were made against the mother, by the doctors. She willingly underwent a medical examination and it was found that she was normal and healthy, with no syphilitic taint. The examiner stated:

"I do not think there is any reason whatever to suspect that she has ever suffered from syphilis. I find no indication of such disease."

Some of the doctors at the inquest persisted in their morbid character defamation charges against the mother and refused to believe the medical report that gave her a clean bill of health. On the strength of their own opinions they insisted that she was syphilitic and would not be able to give birth to another normal baby.

To prove that the accusations of the doctors were unjustified she had the following photograph taken after the birth of her next child, Frederick John, who was 10 weeks old at the time his was taken. It is apparent that the child is well and healthy—and unvaccinated. The fathers (in England) who refused to have their children serve prison terms under compulsory vaccination but many of them accepted this punishment in order to save their children from the deadly effects of vaccination.

The Munchner Illustrierte, June 28, 1951, reported the "mysterious death of six infants after smallpox vaccinations." After the photographs and story of these deaths occurred many other parents came forth with similar stories, although the doctors had named some other cause for the deaths. Most of the vaccination deaths are unknown because they are unreported as such (see the chapter on Falsified Death Certificates, Book II).

This tragic case was brought to the attention of the House of Commons in the hope that an investigation would be made of the hazards of vaccination and others would be warned of the danger. Mr. Bevan was shown the possibility of other similar results if the same practice was continued and he was asked if he would make the result of his inquiry fully available to the House of Commons and the public.

Because the father defied the vaccination law and refused to have his other child vaccinated he was to be prosecuted. He carried his blind child into the court room and showed her eyes and her arm which was enlarged, deformed and sore from the shoulder to the finger tips. The evidence and the public sentiment against the vaccination law influenced the magistrates to exempt the father from having his other child vaccinated.