Like it? Share it!

Sign up for news and updates!






Enter word seen below
Visually impaired? Click here to have an audio challenge played.  You will then need to enter the code that is spelled out.
Change image

CAPTCHA image
Please leave this field empty

Login Form



Smallpox: A Vaccine Triumph Story PDF Print E-mail
Swift
Written by Leart Shaka   

[Editor's Note: Today we are celebrating the anniversary of the discovery of the Smallpox Vaccine. Please enjoy and pass this along.]

When was the last time you lost a loved one to smallpox? When was the last time you heard of anyone dying of smallpox? When was the last time you even heard about anyone sick with it? If you cannot readily answer any of those questions, there’s a reason for that: smallpox is the only disease that has been eradicated by a vaccine. The last natural acquired case was recorded in Somalia in 1977. The worldwide eradication of smallpox was certified by a commission of scientists in December 1979, and subsequently endorsed by the World Health Assembly in 1980. The use of the smallpox vaccine was discontinued in the U.S. in the 1970, way before many of us were born.

The smallpox may be gone, but just like with its “lucky” victims, it has left deep scars on humanity. On the anniversary of the smallpox vaccine, let us take a look at the dreaded disease, the vaccine that ultimately beat it, and the anti-vaccine movement it spawned.

The Disease

Smallpox is credited with being the deadliest disease to ever have befallen human kind; it killed over 500 million people, more than any other disease has, and more than all the wars of the twentieth century combined. When the European settlers brought it over in North America, it decimated the native inhabitants: their population went from 70,000,000 to a little over 600,000. No disease was more destructive than smallpox.

Getting sick with it was not fun either. The disease started with fever, headache, nausea, but these common symptoms would soon morph into something out of a horror movie. Dr. Paul Offit describes the disease in his latest book, Deadly Choices: How the Anti-Vaccine Movement Threatens Us All, as such:

The face, trunk, and limbs erupted in pus-filled blisters that smelled like rotting flesh - blisters so painful that victims felt like their skin was on fire. Worse: smallpox was highly contagious, spread easily by coughing, sneezing, or even talking. As a consequence smallpox infected almost everyone. Pregnant women suffered miscarriages, young children had stunted growth, many were permanently blinded, and all were left with horribly disfiguring scars. One in three victims died from the disease.

“The smallpox was always present,” wrote a British historian in 1800, “filling the churchyard with corpses, tormenting with constant fears all whom it had not yet stricken, leaving on those whose lives it spared the hideous traces of its powers, turning the babe into a changeling at which the mother shuddered, and making the eyes and cheeks of the betrothed maiden object of horror to the lover.”

It is believed smallpox originated about 3,000 years ago in Egypt or India, and went on to become one of the most devastating diseases mankind has ever faced, decimating populations for centuries. In some cultures custom forbade the naming of a newborn until he/she had caught and survived the disease. It killed Queen Mary II, King Luis I of Spain, Tsar Peter II of Russia, and King Louis XV of France among others.

No effective treatment was ever developed for smallpox. In its deadliest form (variola major) it killed as many as 30% of those infected, and between 65-80% of those it did not kill were left with scars, most prominent in their face. One third of all reported blindness in 18th century Europe was due to smallpox. No one can tell for sure what would have happened if the vaccine had never been invented, but I think it’d be safe to say that many millions of people would have either died or suffered horribly until an alternate solution would have been found.

Thankfully, it turned out that we did not need to experience that alternative scenario. The smallpox vaccine came to humanity’s rescue.

The Vaccine

The smallpox vaccine is both the first vaccine ever invented, and the first one to eradicate the disease it targeted. Its inventor is Edward Jenner, who in 1798 showed that inoculation with cowpox provided protection against smallpox. Jenner was told by a milkmaid that after getting cowpox from milking sick cows, she developed immunity towards smallpox.

On May 14, 1976 Jenner tested the phenomenon: he took fluid from a blister of another milkmaid, and then injected it under the skin of the eight-year old son of a local laborer. The boy developed a small blister which eventually fell off. To test for immunity, Jenner then injected the boy with pus taken from someone with smallpox. The boy survived. The test was a success, and the most successful vaccine of our time was born. Jenner published his finding in 1978; his vaccine spread out rapidly: between 1810 and 1820 the vaccine halved the number of deaths from smallpox.

In the early 1950s, about 50 million cases of smallpox occurred worldwide in a year; by 1967 that number had dropped to 10-15 million cases. At that time, the WHO launched an intensified plan to eradicate the disease, which by then killed 25% of all infected. No effective treatment was ever developed for smallpox, but, thanks to vaccines, by 1980 the disease was eradicated. Millions of lives and untold amounts of suffering and misery have undoubtedly been spared since.

The Anti-Vax movement is born

Jenner’s smallpox vaccine was a triumph and well accepted, that is until the British Government decided to require vaccination. That was the moment the organized anti-vaccine movement was born.

In 1853 the British Government passed a compulsory vaccination law. It required all children to be vaccinated, or the parents would face fines and imprisonment. That law however did not clarify how it was going to be enforced, and as a result it wasn’t enforced properly, leading to a reduction in vaccination rates.

Having learned their lesson, the British Government passed a new act in 1967 which clearly defined how the law would be enforced. Parents that did not comply would first be issued a warning by the medical officers. If the warning was ignored the parents would be taken to court where they faced fines and court costs. If they refused to, or could not afford to, pay the fines their assets would be seized and sold at auction. If enough money was not raised that way, one of them would be imprisoned for up to two weeks.

Compulsory vaccination is what gave birth to the anti-vaccine movement. The first anti-vaccine organization, the Anti-Compulsory Vaccination League was founded by Richard Butler Gibbs, his brother George and cousin John. By 1900, over 200 anti-vaccine leagues had been formed by British citizens.

Their rhetoric was fiery and wrapped in language of patriotism and freedom. They likened vaccination to Devil worshipping and human sacrifice; doctors were portrayed as vampires “hovering over pregnant women”. They maintained Jenner’s vaccine contained “the blood entrails and excretions of bats, toads and suckling whelps” and that it transformed a child into “a scrofulous, idiotic ape, a hideous foul-skinned cripple: a diseased burlesque on mankind”. Sound familiar?

Because the smallpox vaccine was derived from cowpox, people were actually afraid they would turn into cows. There were reports of the “ox-faced boy or children who ran about on all fours, bellowed, coughed, and squinted like cows.” This sentiment has been famously captured in a caricature by James Gillray, titled “The Cow-Pock or the Wonderful effects of the New Inoculation” which shows people being turned into cows from his vaccine: they had horns, snouts, or had small cows growing like tumors in their bodies.

Cow Pox vaccine scare illustration from 1802

Conclusion

Smallpox is gone, and the vaccine that defeated it is no longer being used, unfortunately as all vaccines are bound to, this one had a side effect which we’re still dealing with today: the anti-vaccine movement. Quite literally, so long as we’ve had vaccines, we’ve had anti-vaxers. Their arguments have not changed much: doctors are evil, vaccines are unnatural and dirty, they are made up of toxic materials, they cause asthma, diabetes, autism, or kill infants. What has changed substantially is their ability to reach the masses via Oprah, Larry King Live, Times Square ads, books, the Internet, Playboy bunnies, comedians and doctors who’ve given up on science and the scientific method.

I am worried that our constant exposure to the anti-vax message might have inoculated us against it. It worries me that we might have become so complacent, even within the skeptical movement, that some of us might have become passive consumers of skeptical information, but are unwilling to take the next step and become skeptical activists.

So I urge you all to take a few minutes and do something. Lend a helping hand to those of us fighting the good fight. I urge you to please take a moment to join our mailing list at Vaccine Times. Learn the facts and counter the anti-vax arguments whenever you come across them on the internet.

There are a lot of skeptics out there, but what we need are a lot of active skeptics. After all, smallpox has been eradicated, but polio hasn’t; measles hasn’t, whooping cough hasn’t. Children are still dying from these diseases.

And that is something we all should be scared of.

Sources

World Health Organization

History of Vaccines

Offit, Paul. Deadly Choices: How the Anti-vaccine movement threatens us all. New York: Basic Books, 2011

 

Leart Shaka is a NYC based skeptic, who is focusing his skeptical efforts in countering anti-vaccine misinformation. He is the creator, and Editor-In-Chief, of The Vaccine Times, a quarterly pro-health publication, for parents, by parents, and runs the Vaccine Times website and blog. He can be found on Twitter as @Skepdude and @VaccineTimes.

 

CORRECTIONS: 05/16/11

Some astute readers have pointed out a few errors in the above entry. These are the corrections:

Jenner tested his vaccine on May, 14 1796 not 1976
Jenner published his findings in 1798 not 1978
The British government second compulsory act was passed in 1867 not 1967

The sentence: "When the European settlers brought it over in North America, it decimated the native inhabitants: their population went from 70,000,000 to a little over 600,000." was based on an erroneous source (which has been made aware and is taking steps to correct its own statement), and is incorrect as worded. Correctly worded it should read as such: " When the European settlers brought it over to North and South America, it contributed to the decimation of the native population, which, due to warfare and disease, went from 70,000,000 to a little over 600,000."

Trackback(0)
Comments (43)Add Comment
Dates?
written by Mike Xeno, May 14, 2011
This is a fascinating article, but the timeline of dates would seem to be a little... wonky. Let's see if I have this straight:

1798: Edward Jenner shows that inoculation with cowpox provides protection against smallpox.

1853: British government passes a compulsory vaccination law.

1900: 200 anti-vaccination leagues are formed by British citizens.

1967: After 114 years of confusion, the British Government finally clarifies how the compulsory vaccination law will be enforced.

1970: Smallpox vaccine use ended in U.S.

1976: Edward Jenner, now over 200 years old, tests cowpox as a vaccine for smallpox by injecting it into an 8-year-old boy. I would imagine that everyone wonders why he would bother at this point.

1977: Last recorded natural case of Smallpox, in Somalia.

1978: Edward Jenner publishes his findings. Everyone wonders what took him so long.

1980: Smallpox considered eradicated by WHO.

report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +9
...
written by MadScientist, May 14, 2011
"their population went from 70,000,000 to a little over 600,000"

What is the source of those figures? Aside from 70M looking suspiciously large for the population of North America in that era, the implied combination of infection rate and survival rate yielding less than 1% of the population remaining seems extremely small.

report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
Re: Dates?
written by Leart Shaka, May 14, 2011
There's nothing to say except I've got egg on my face. Somehow I ended up typing all the 1790s dates as 1970s. I should've had someone else review before I sent this in. I apologize for the confusion, will be more careful next time. Mike, get in touch via e-mail at admin@vaccinetimes.com if you're willing to be my second pair of eyes.

These are the correct dates:

5/14/1796 - Smallpox Vaccine invented by Jenner
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +6
Re: Dates?
written by Leart Shaka, May 14, 2011
More date corrections:

1798 - Jenner published his findings
1867 - British Government passes second compulsory vaccination act
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +2
Mad Scientist
written by Leart Shaka, May 14, 2011
I took those figures from Paul Offit's book "Deadly Choices: How the anti-vaccine movement threatens us all"
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +2
I beg to differ
written by ragnar, May 14, 2011
The smallpox vaccine has NOT been discontinued in the US.

When I entered the military in 1983 I was given the smallpox vaccine.
In 2006 I got a booster.

Many many many other people in my unit got them too.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
numbers
written by MadScientist, May 14, 2011
I haven't read Dr. Offit's book - are you sure that's 70M vs. 600K? If so, perhaps Dr. Offit (or the publisher) made a mistake. As I've said, the overall fatalities is quite amazing. Even looking at the Wikipedia (which I don't recommend for accuracy, but it often gives an OK picture, just like a Dead Tree Edition Encyclopedia), the estimates for fatalities due to several diseases (including smallpox) is on the order of 80% of the population and the high rate of fatalities went on for quite a few years (basically until mostly human lineages with adequate resistance to the diseases survived - a case of natural selection). Of course such rates of decline in a population are not unknown, but they are extremely rare and hence my questions.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
RE: Numbers
written by Leart Shaka, May 14, 2011
That's a good point actually; given all the slaughtering and all the other causes of death it does sound a little unlikely that the decline from 70M to 600K could have been due solely to smallpox. You're right to be skeptical. Here is the complete sentence from Dr. Offit's book that I based that part on: " When European settlers brought smallpox to North America, they reduced the native population of seventy million to six hundred thousand."
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +1
I beg to differ
written by Leart Shaka, May 14, 2011
Routine vaccination with the smallpox vaccine has indeed been discontinued. The latest recommended vaccine schedule http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/re...ule-pr.pdfdoes not include the smallpox vaccine, and it hasn't for a long time. Those in the military however are still given the smallpox vaccine as protection against bioweapons, http://www.smallpox.mil/messag...sp?cID=167, the same way military personnel is also vaccinated against anthrax for the same reasons.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +2
N.American Death Rates
written by adering, May 14, 2011
The introduction of smallpox to the new world did not reduce the population from 700M to 600,000.

Smallpox was one of several diseases that came over as part of the "Columbian exchange." Other diseases included influenza, chicken pox, cholera, measles, typhoid and a couple others. The cumulative effect of all these diseases was devastating, in part because they came in waves. The group would just come out of the tragedy of burying the measles victims, and along comes cholera. Eventually, it becomes a death of a thousand cuts. The community simply loses too many of the people necessary to keep the community functional.

If smallpox hadn't come along with all the other diseases, there still would have been enough diseases to wipe out the peoples on North America.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +2
re: numbers
written by MadScientist, May 14, 2011
Thanks; I guess I'll have to find out what Dr. Offit's source was. Russel Thornton for example estimates the indigenous population north of the Rio Grande at around 7M before they were decimated by disease and estimates a recovery to a mere 530K around 1900. Other estimates I've seen figure about 31M for all of North America with fatality rates due to disease ranging from 80-90%, which would still leave roughly 3M people.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
...
written by Caller X, May 14, 2011
written by Leart Shaka, May 14, 2011
That's a good point actually; given all the slaughtering and all the other causes of death it does sound a little unlikely that the decline from 70M to 600K could have been due solely to smallpox. You're right to be skeptical. Here is the complete sentence from Dr. Offit's book that I based that part on: " When European settlers brought smallpox to North America, they reduced the native population of seventy million to six hundred thousand."


Busy beavers, those Europeans. They not only had time to infect the Indians, they had time to count them. Given that the European-introduced smallpox reduced the indigenous population by over 99 percent, just think what the population of Europe would have been without smallpox.

You definitely should have had someone look this article over. A second set of eyes in private is always a good idea.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
RE: Numbers
written by Leart Shaka, May 15, 2011
I looked into this a little deeper. Dr. Offit's source is a book called "Scourge" by Tucker. It can be found on Google books. The actual page where Dr. Offit based his sentence on at the end of page 11 and beginning of page 12 which is visible in Google books. That sentence reads: "According to one estimate, the Native Population of the North and South America, which had numbered roughly 72 million when Columbus landed in 1492, had diminished by warfare and disease to about 600,000 in 1800, a staggering decline". Clearly Offit made an error in his book which lead me to make an error here. Teaches one a lesson about relying on second hand sources, although it is impossible to not rely on books as sources if one writes extensively. Nevertheless, I take that sentence back. The decline was not due to just smallpox.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +1
numbers
written by MadScientist, May 15, 2011
That's OK. Numbers are always difficult to get right since it does require some effort tracing the references and looking up other sources. Many historical population figures are particularly difficult since they are essentially guesses.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
I'm sure it goes without saying, Lowly rated comment [Show]
No really Vaccines are safe. , Lowly rated comment [Show]
anti-vax claims
written by MadScientist, May 16, 2011
The post by 'goddess' above is typical of an anti-vaxxer. First the claim of "so much evidence" while providing no evidence whatsoever - just an unsupported assertion that "... Guillain-Barré syndrome, appeared іn rising percentages οf thе 45 million public who hаd bееn vaccinated". The claim is at least as ridiculous as the "vaccines must cause autism because the increasing diagnosis of autism coincides with more people being vaccinated and autism is usually diagnosed some time after the kids get their shots".
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +7
It's called common sense Madman, Lowly rated comment [Show]
...
written by William, May 16, 2011
Bea - I'll warn you right now, this is NOT the forum to promote any anti-vax ideas. You WILL lose, and you are looking like an idiot. And since you don't even know that H2O is the chemical formula for water, any scientific claim you make has no (zero, zip, nada) credibility.

My cat has an adverse reaction to the rabies vaccine as well. But the adverse reaction (which ALWAYS goes away) is better than the alternative. The cat is now at least 15 years old.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +2
Excuse me. . . I know what H2O is?, Lowly rated comment [Show]
Oh yeah and both of my unvaccinated cats, Lowly rated comment [Show]
...
written by William, May 16, 2011
You're starting down the anti-vax path by insisting it is a choice. Anytime someone chooses to not vaccinate, it puts the population at risk. Smallpox was eradicated for the simple reason that the government mandated it. Look at the timeline, and how quickly it was eradicated once vaccines became compulsory. The disease can still spread to those who ARE vaccinated (yes, it's true, and we scientists admit that!), but the risk greatly diminishes only if the entire population is inoculated.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +5
Trolls
written by Matt_D, May 16, 2011
Don't feed them.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +5
H2O Comment
written by William, May 16, 2011
written by Bea, December 08, 2010
PS-You know H20 is not really water.


Followed by:

Somebody decided H2O was a symbol for water and it was accepted. What if I decided or someone else that A3J is a symbol for water. It is semantics . . . interpretation.


I'm holding you to that.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +5
It should be a choice, Lowly rated comment [Show]
OMG . . . , Lowly rated comment [Show]
...
written by William, May 16, 2011
Cull the herd of sheeple and do it quick.


We'd hate to lose you, Bea.

And Matt, I'm trying to save her. It's my Christian nature. But perhaps, I can save people from sending her money for her "readings". I'd certainly hate for the facts to get in the way of her beliefs.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +1
A Christian and a Scientist, Lowly rated comment [Show]
The day Big Pharma, Lowly rated comment [Show]
...
written by William, May 16, 2011
The day Big Pharma vaccinates for free, I will read for free.


Merck donated one million doses of Recombivax HB to prevent hepatitis B over five years. The value is $100 million. They also (along with other "Big Pharma") offer free vaccines to those in need. No profit, all "on their dime".

So, Bea, now what are you going to do for income?
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +4
That is charity . . .. they make billions in profits. That is like 10 bucks for them., Lowly rated comment [Show]
...
written by Raman, May 16, 2011
It seems the idea of inoculating people from smallpox by putting them in contact with puss actually originated in China, at least since the 16th century. That practice was discussed by Voltaire in 1734. The mechanisms of vaccination were then first scientifically described by Pasteur.

While Jenner did do the experiment described here, he was neither the first nor the only one. Why credit him as the inventor then?
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +2
@goddess
written by Hierro, May 16, 2011
So how many people did you help with your "readings"?
Did you help them avoid a debilitating disease or just make them feel better?
It would be laughable to me that you would compare your "charitable" to $100 million worth of vaccines.

I personally wouldn't get upset at you for telling stories about yourself. I already know that they're full of shit. Like I know you are every time you open your mouth (or uncurl your fingers to type at the keyboard).

I find it funny though, how you quickly changed the argument from a scientific one (which you will obviously lose) to one of civil liberties. Sorry, no one's buying it.
You couldn't be more wrong if your name was Wrongo Wrongenstein.

I think you're trying to be clever by saying that H2O is just a symbol of water. Congratulations on pointing out the fact that there's a word and a chemical symbol for "water". Now get over it.
H2O is chemically defined as 2 Hydrogen atoms and a single Oxygen atoms. Those combined make water. And the fact that your dog got cured of his swelling by drinking water (aka homeopathy) impresses no one.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +4
I am not here, Lowly rated comment [Show]
...
written by William, May 17, 2011
Then Bea, why ARE you here?
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
William, Lowly rated comment [Show]
@goddess
written by Hierro, May 19, 2011
Normally I would be apologetic for hurting someone's feelings. I'm generally not confrontational.
However, you have clearly shown that you are NOT here to learn the skeptical point of view. You are merely here to validate your own anger and hurt feelings when someone tells you that you are wrong. Much like the spoiled child who begs for the newest toy when everyone knows you just want it to strap some bottle rockets or M-80s and watch it blow up.

That is why I will not apologize for saying what I did in an earlier post. It is a statement of fact based on your previous comments and assertions. (see how I used evidence there?)

I'm fairly sure you care very much for people. I have met many people who believe in your nonsense and are genuinely interested in helping people. What I am deeply suspicious of is your "wealth of knowledge about the spiritual realm." Also, your assertion that "One day when I am ready, I will share the knowledge" cannot be taken seriously by a thinking adult. It's no different than a realtor telling you, "Just put 30 dollars a month towards your dream home in Beverly Hills and ONE DAY it'll be yours. Nonono, don't use a calculator to determine how long it will take. Trust me when I tell you that one day you'll own it with just 30 dollars a month. And when that time comes you'll see that it was worth it."
It's plain for anyone with basic math that you will have died long before acquiring that home.

It is true that all I want is proof. You must submit yourself to a double-blind study conducted by trained experts (such as those at the JREF) and the results must be consistently above chance.
Your anecdotes are only a starting point of investigation, but they are not the basis of proof.

Have a good day.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +2
@goddess The analogies are intended to simplify concepts for your simple brain
written by Hierro, May 20, 2011
Funny thing is, I never claimed to be a psychic. Not even to be a bad one.
Another funny thing is how you assert skeptics to be "just like religious fundamentalist zealots." What is your basis for such an assertion? To what God(s) do skeptics claim to receive guidance from? What holy book do they claim is inerrant?
I have yet to see any of these characteristics in the skeptic community. Perhaps some have a "knee-jerk" reaction to the sorts of claims you make, but it seems understandable when (as of today) claims of spiritual and psychic powers have been 100% refuted. Of course, maybe tomorrow it's proven correct. A scientist/skeptic can never be sure he's correct, only that he is not wrong at the moment (quote by Richard Feynman).
What other group openly admits that they are not correct?

Which group of people would suffice as scientists to establish your claims under double-blind studies? You earlier claimed that "no proof was good enough" for the skeptic, but it seems that no group of people are qualified to study your magic. Were your powers to be true, then they would surely fall in some category of the known laws of physics or you may be the one to unveil new laws. Your proof would do more than just win you a million dollars from the JREF; it would revolutionize the modern world and improve it immensely by establishing whole new ways of communication and education.
So why are you hesitant to undertake a test to very your powers and determine their workings? The help you're providing now would be a pittance compared to the help you could be supplying to millions of people by examining your powers and understanding them in a rigorous and scientific manner.

I think I have made it quite clear that you are not helping but rather hindering humanity by delaying the evidence of your abilities and submitting them to scientific inquiry. It would be much like someone who has all the tools and formulation to rid the world of cancer, but insists that they will not show it to the world and will only help individuals in an arbitrarily selective fashion.

Your client got the $500 check because she made a phone call to people who care deeply for the well-being of other human beings. I don't see how you helped.
Had you told me that $10000 appeared in a crate on her front lawn with no return address, then I would have been intrigued. However, this is again only anecdotal evidence, much like the boy who tells his friends that he really did see Bigfoot in his backyard; there is no way to accurately validate this claim without knowing everyone involved and determining their credibility.

I may not have a clue what you're talking about, but it's not for lack of trying. Some things just don't plain make sense. I prefer things that don't make sense in book format, such as in "The Three Little Pigs" or "Humpty-Dumpty." At least there's an interesting moral at the end of those stories.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +2
You brain is not just simple. It is bordering on mentally disabled
written by goddess, May 21, 2011
The couple were strangers she just met within two hours of our journey. Hierro, we're done. I don't get into a battle of wits with an unarmed man.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: -7
@goddess
written by Hierro, May 21, 2011
Isn't technology amazing? The telephone can connect two strangers in a matter of minutes. Your client made a phone call to people who were likely to donate (considering that she is partnered with the Xrysalis Foundation, they likely have a database of people who have donated), she spoke to very kind people, and they were merely happy to donate their money to help a cause.
Again, don't see any "psychic" influence here.

Perhaps you would prefer to engage in a psychic battle, like Cartman did in South Park?
Nunnunu! Choo-choo! lol
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
Once again for the mentally disabled Hierro
written by goddess, May 21, 2011
She met them on the street. Perfect strangers. Get it. Can you understand that? Or is it beyond your comprehension skills? I already know the answer . . . YES with a drum roll.

Maria the Moderator. You know what would be a great addition to this site. The ability to block posters so you don't have to read their stupid remarks the way they do on Facebook. Just a thought.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: -5
@Goddess
written by mariamyrback, May 21, 2011
That blocking function has already been suggested by other frustrated people.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +1
Thanks Maria
written by goddess, May 21, 2011
I think it would solve the issue. I like to be civil but certain people just push and push and then I just want to . . . well you know . . tell them to take a long walk on a short pier. But I think of you and I don't. smilies/smiley.gif
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: -5

Write comment
This content has been locked. You can no longer post any comment.
You must be logged in to post a comment. Please register if you do not have an account yet.

busy