Posted April 10, 2023
I did not compile the list below. Thank you to Jamie on twitter (@JamieAA_Again) and Amandha Vollmer. Amandha’s descriptions are in italics.
1919:
100 WW1 prisoners were taken under the guidance of US Navy officer JM Rosenau and injected with, rubbed into the eyes nose and throats of, cough and kissed by people with Spanish flu. After 12 weeks and two separate trials 0 of the men got sick.
In March of 1919 Rosenau & Keegan conducted 9 separate experiments in a group of 49 healthy men, to prove contagion. In all 9 experiments, 0/49 men became sick after being exposed to sick people or the bodily fluids of sick people. — Amandha Vollmer
Study:
https://sci-hub.se/10.1001/jama.1919.02610310005002
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/article-abstract/221687
In November 1919, 8 separate experiments were conducted by Rosenau et al. in a group of 62 men trying to prove that influenza is contagious and causes disease. In all 8 experiments, 0/62 men became sick.Another set of 8 experiments were undertaken in December of 1919 by McCoy et al. in 50 men to try and prove contagion. Once again, all 8 experiments failed to prove people with influenza, or their bodily fluids cause illness. 0/50 men became sick.In 1919, Wahl et al. conducted 3 separate experiments to infect 6 healthy men with influenza by exposing them to mucous secretions and lung tissue from sick people. 0/6 men contracted influenza in any of the three studies. — Amandha Vollmer
https://www.jstor.org/stable/30082102?seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents
The Infectious Myth Busted Part 1: The Rosenau Spanish Flu Experiments (1918) — by Mike Stone, ViroLIEgy
https://viroliegy.com/2021/10/03/the-infectious-myth-busted-part-1-the-rosenau-spanish-flu-experiments-1918/
1919:
Wahl et al conducted 3 separate trials on six men attempting to infect them with different strains of Influenza. Not a single person got sick.
https://www.jstor.org/stable/30082102?seq=7#metadata_info_tab_contents
In 1920, Schmidt et al conducted two controlled experiments, exposing healthy people to the bodily fluids of sick people. Of 196 people exposed to the mucous secretions of sick people, 21 (10.7%) developed colds and three developed grippe (1.5%). In the second group, of the 84 healthy people exposed to mucous secretions of sick people, five developed grippe (5.9%) and four colds (4.7%). Of forty-three controls who had been inoculated with sterile physiological salt solutions eight (18.6%) developed colds. A higher percentage of people got sick after being exposed to saline compared to those being exposed to the “virus”.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19869857/
https://catalog.hathitrust.org/Record/102609951
In 1921, Williams et al. tried to experimentally infect 45 healthy men with the common cold and influenza, by exposing them to mucous secretions from sick people. 0/45 became ill.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19869857/
In 1924, Robertson & Groves exposed 100 healthy individuals to the bodily secretions from 16 different people suffering from influenza. The authors concluded that 0/100 became sick as a result of being exposed to the bodily secretions.
https://academic.oup.com/jid/article-abstract/34/4/400/832936?redirectedFrom=fulltext
Robertson & Groves exposed 100 healthy individuals to the bodily secretions from 16 different people suffering from influenza. 0 people of 100 whom they deliberately tried to infect with Influenza got sick. That is because Viruses don’t cause disease.
1930:
Dochez et al tried to infect 11 men with intranasal influenza. Not a single person got sick. Most strikingly one person got very sick when he accidently found out that is what they were trying to do. His symptoms disappeared when they told him he was misinformed.
In 1930, Dochez et al. attempted to infect a group of men experimentally with the common cold. The authors stated in their results, something that is nothing short of amazing.”It was apparent very early that this individual was more or less unreliable and from the start it was possible to keep him in the dark regarding our procedure. He had inconspicuous symptoms after his test injection of sterile broth and no more striking results from the cold filtrate, until an assistant, on the second day after injection, inadvertently referred to this failure to contract a cold.That evening and night the subject reported severe symptomatology, including sneezing, cough, sore throat and stuffiness in the nose. The next morning he was told that he had been misinformed in regard to the nature of the filtrate and his symptoms subsided within the hour. It is important to note that there was an entire absence of objective pathological changes”.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19869798/
1936:
STUDIES ON THE VIRUS OF INFLUENZA
BY A. R. DOCHEZ, M.D., K. C. MILLS, AI~D YALE KNEELAND, JR., M.D.
https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/459f/d1d7a5c616cb1fe42434ad2259b99c824d3b.pdf
Summary:
https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/STUDIES-ON-THE-VIRUS-OF-INFLUENZA-Dochez-Mills/ac4818b002df7163e4a28c18e83c3810fe232066
In 1937 Burnet & Lush conducted an experiment exposing 200 healthy people to bodily secretions from people infected with influenza. 0/200 became sick.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2065253/
1937:
Burnet and Lush 200 people given “Melbourne type” Influenza . 0 people showed any symptoms of disease.
In 1940, Burnet and Foley tried to experimentally infect 15 university students with influenza. The authors concluded their experiment was a failure.
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.5694/j.1326-5377.1940.tb79929.
THE GOVERNMENT KNOW THAT VIRUSES DON’T CAUSE DISEASE. Jonathan Van Tam conducted these human trials of Flu A on 2013. 52 people were intentionally given “Flu A” and made to live in controlled conditions with 75 people. 0 people sick. 0 PCR positive
https://journals.plos.org/plospathogens/article?id=10.1371/journal.ppat.1008704
CHICKEN POX All human studies have failed to induce varicella in humans by inoculation with fluids from others pox. The entire myth is based on rabbits whose balls were ground up and injected into another’s brains whilst cutting the skin and only then did pox appear. Seriously.
Before 2007 when they tortured 7 monkeys until they got sick every basis for Measles being caused by a virus came from this paper, which when you actually read it showed that the results were negative. Viruses don’t cause disease.
1975 Douglas Gordon et Al study gave 10 people English type Influenza and 10 people a placebo. The study was negative. Most telling is they admit that mild symptoms were seen in the placebo group, proving that the inoculation methods cause them.
1940 Thomas Francis Jr. Gave 11 people “Epidemic Influenza” 0 people got sick. That is because viruses don’t cause1936 Thomas Francis Jr et Al gave 23 people influenza via 3 different methods. 0 people got sick.. They gave 2 people already “suffering from colds” the influenza who also did not get sick disease
John Treanor et Al 1999, gave 108 people Influenza A. Only 35% recorded mild symptoms such as stuffy nose. Unfortunately 35% of the placebo control group also developed mild symptoms proving the methods of inoculation are causing them and viruses don’t cause disease.
Thread here:
https://twitter.com/JamieAA_Again/status/1629597431934464002
The next thread is also from Jamie:
https://twitter.com/JamieAA_Again/status/1617266852194918400
On 31st March 2022 Jonathan Van Tam et al gave 36 people what he considered to be purified Covid Virus Intranasally [the study is here: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-022-01780-9]. The Results: Nobody got sick.
They took what they believed to be “Isolated” virus : A completely unregulated concoction knowingly containing Monkey Kidney cells and Numerous Antibiotics such as Amphoterecin. It could however have anything else in it as Trial “medicine” is given exemption for regulation
They put it up the noses of 36 people (Incidentally paid £4k each) and monitored them for 28 days with 2x daily PCR tests and LFT again up the nose, so each participant would have received 56! Nasal swabs The results: only 18 positive for the virus they intentionally put there
Even if you think that PCR aren’t the fraudulent piece of junk they are, a result of ~50% is nowhere near being causative..it doesn’t even show correlation. Of these 36 people they gave 10 Remdisivir that is known to cause Renal failure before the test
Of the entire group of 36, 18 reported “symptoms” on a self reporting (
) scorecard. These 18 bizarrely were not all in the PCR positive group. They were all mild to moderate forms of very mild “symptoms” that are not indicative of disease such as “stuffy nose or headache”
Some feeble minds might point at a stuffy nose or headache and say : “Look he’s got Covid”. Here is what could have caused a stuffy nose other than a virus: 1. The additives in “viral”concoction. 2. The 56 nasal swabs. 3. The intranasal inoculation process 4. The Remdisivir 5. The fear of thinking you are going to get sick. 6. The hospital environment, heavily filtered Aircon, Hospital food
etc etc etc. There was indeed NO CONTROL GROUP thus rendering the results scientifically meaningless.
********* I DON’T RECALL WHERE I FOUND THE LIST BELOW ********
Notes from here:
https://dpl003.substack.com/p/virology-the-damning-evidence
*Note 1 – Ben Killingley, 2022:
- Ben Killingley also conducted a study in the early 2010’s in which he had inoculated people in a room with 75 others some wearing masks others as a control. Not a single person even tested PCR positive. Some links to his previous studies include a 2011, 2019 and a 2020 study.It is assumed that his latest, 2022 study, is a follow up to cover the findings of his previous findings. Some additional notes on the study referenced include:– They gave 10 people the potent nephrotoxin Remdisivir.– They measure sickness by means of a PCR test which isn’t indicative of disease because it can tests positive with “asymptomatic” cases as well.– Even if you say that a runny nose after swabbing is Covid. A 50% outcome to a direct challenge of something is a negative result. It doesn’t suggest causation which would need to be at least 90%.– The very methods of inoculation used during the study could cause the nasal congestion/discharge (which is their measure of whether someone is sick or not). This has been shown in previous studies.– Lastly nobody was given “regeneron” because nobody got “sick”.
*Note 2 – Dr Robert Willner, 1994:
- December 7th 1994 Hollywood Roosevelt Hotel, Greensboro, N.C., Dr Willner (a medical doctor of 40 years experience) an outspoken whistleblower of the AIDS hoax. In front of a gathering of about 30 alternative-medicine practitioners and several journalists, Willner stuck a needle in the finger of Andres, 27, a Fort Lauderdale student who says he has tested positive for HIV. Then, wincing, the 65-year-old doctor stuck himself. In 1993, Dr. Willner stunned Spain by inoculating himself with the blood of Pedro Tocino, an HIV positive hemophiliac. This demonstration of devotion to the truth and the Hippocratic Oath he took, nearly 40 years before, was reported on the front page of every major newspaper in Spain. His appearance on Spain’s most popular television show envoked a 4 to 1 response by the viewing audience in favor of his position against the “AIDS hypothesis.” When asked why he would put his life on the line to make a point, Dr. Willner replied: “I do this to put a stop to the greatest murderous fraud in medical history. By injecting myself with HIV positive blood, I am proving the point as Dr. Walter Reed did to prove the truth about yellow fever. In this way it is my hope to expose the truth about HIV in the interest of all mankind.” He tested negative multiple times. He died of a Heart attack 4 months later 15th April 1995 (yeh right, funny how these naysayers all die suddenly. Link to the presentation here.
Studies that tried to prove you could catch a “disease” but they all failed
Contagion a Fairy Story
MORRISONS SUPERMARKET COVID SIMULATION EVENT
Experiments that failed to show virus contagion
https://i.postimg.cc/RhyDkMCw/Experiments-that-failed-to-show-virus-contagion.jpg
https://i.postimg.cc/nz5GRCmB/Experiments-which-failed-to-prove-contagion.jpg
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/article-abstract/219497
Experiments with measles that failed to show contagion
https://i.postimg.cc/cL7kvLNc/measles.jpg
Scientists Proved Viruses Are Not Contagious in 1918
A study on infectivity of asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 carriers
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32405162/
Some interesting yet unsuccessful attempts to spread influenza
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/04/150430170750.htm
Does Influenza Transmission Occur from Asymptomatic Infection or Prior to Symptom Onset?
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/003335490912400205
Cases with mild symptoms & no fever can’t spread infection
EXPERIMENTS TO DETERMINE MODE OF SPREAD OF INFLUENZA
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/article-abstract/221687
Dr Rosenau experiments to determine mode of spread of influenza
https://sci-hub.se/https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/article-abstract/221687
Experiments Upon Volunteers to Determine the Cause and Mode of Spread of Influenza, Boston, November and December, 1918
https://quod.lib.umich.edu/f/flu/3750flu.0016.573
Although these experiments are too few in number to be conclusive, they indicate that the causative agent of swine influenza is not a filtrable virus.
https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/7832816.pdf
WHO: No Asymptomatic Transmission, April, 2020
WHO Says It’s ‘Rare’ for Asymptomatic Covid-19 Patients to Infect Others
National Institute of Health US 1921
https://play.google.com/store/books/details?id=wC1DAAAAYAAJ
Salicylates and Pandemic Influenza Mortality, 1918–1919 Pharmacology, Pathology, and Historic Evidence
https://academic.oup.com/cid/article/49/9/1405/301441
150 U.S. Public Health Service Experiments from 1919 prove that disease is not transmittable
Dr. Matthew J. Rodermund, MD offered $10k to anyone who could prove scientifically that smallpox is contagious. Nobody ever claimed the money.
http://www.whale.to/vaccines/smallpox8.html
Experiments to Determine Mode of Spread of Influenza Milton J Rosenau
https://zenodo.org/record/1505669
1918 deer island flu survivors at a naval prison
Dr Robert Willner injects himself with HIV
Germs are powerless to cause disease
On the epidemiology of influenza
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2279112
The State of Science, Microbiology, and Vaccines Circa 1918
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2862332/
Dr. Rodermunds experiment smallpox
https://i.postimg.cc/FHvH0S0n/smallpox.jpg
Experiments at Gallops Island
https://i.postimg.cc/cCWw3B2G/gallopsisland.jpg
Dr Rodermund spreads smallpox on his skin doesn’t get infected
https://i.postimg.cc/8cbWmrgJ/smallpox1.jpg
US Govt tried to infect 100 Navy men with the flu but 100% did not get infected.
https://i.postimg.cc/5y1QnC7f/1918flu.jpg
1918 Goat Island contagion experiment
https://i.postimg.cc/zDHcPqx0/Goat-Island-Contagion-Experiment.jpg
The experiments made at Goat Island by Navy doctors
How did Christian Scientists respond to the 1918–1919 Spanish flu?
Failed attempts to prove scarlet fever contagious
https://i.postimg.cc/FKFqHV9j/Failed-scarlet-fever-contagion.jpg
The failures to inoculate man form impressive evidence that it is not the primary infecting agent. The failure of animal inoculation and the absence of a pandemic strain are further facts in support of this view.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1524149/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1524149/pdf/canmedaj00406-0019.pdf
Pulmonary tuberculosis transmission and its etiology and treatment:
https://books.google.com/books?id=Xw41AQAAMAAJ&pg=PA57&source=gbs_toc_r&cad=4#v=onepage&q&f=false
Perhaps the most interesting epidemiological studies conducted during the 1918–1919 pandemic were the human experiments conducted by the Public Health Service and the U.S. Navy under the supervision of Milton Rosenau on Gallops Island, the quarantine station in Boston Harbor, and on Angel Island, its counterpart in San Francisco. The experiment began with 100 volunteers from the Navy who had no history of influenza. Rosenau was the first to report on the experiments conducted at Gallops Island in November and December 1918. His first volunteers received first one strain and then several strains of Pfeiffer’s bacillus by spray and swab into their noses and throats and then into their eyes. When that procedure failed to produce disease, others were inoculated with mixtures of other organisms isolated from the throats and noses of influenza patients. Next, some volunteers received injections of blood from influenza patients. Finally, 13 of the volunteers were taken into an influenza ward and exposed to 10 influenza patients each. Each volunteer was to shake hands with each patient, to talk with him at close range, and to permit him to cough directly into his face. NONE of the volunteers in these experiments developed influenza. Rosenau was clearly puzzled, and he cautioned against drawing conclusions from negative results. He ended his article in JAMA with a telling acknowledgement: “We entered the outbreak with a notion that we knew the cause of the disease and were quite sure we knew how it was transmitted from person to person. Perhaps, IF WE HAVE LEARNED ANYTHING, IT IS THAT WE ARE NOT QUITE SURE WHAT WE KNOW ABOUT THE DISEASE. The research conducted at Angel Island and that continued in early 1919 in Boston broadened this research by inoculating with the Mathers streptococcus and by including a search for filter-passing agents, but it produced similar negative results. The failures to inoculate man form impressive evidence that it is not the primary infecting agent. The failure of animal inoculation and the absence of a pandemic strain are further facts in support of this view. It seemed that what was thought to be supposedly one of the most contagious of communicable DISEASES COULD NOT BE TRANSFERRED under ANY experimental conditions. This caused the American Public Health Association (APHA) at that time to declare that since the cause of the flu was unknown, there was no logical basis for a vaccine to prevent the disease. In March of 1919 Rosenau & Keegan conducted 9 separate experiments in a group of 49 healthy men, to prove contagion. In all 9 experiments, 0/49 men became sick after being exposed to sick people or the bodily fluids of sick people.
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/article-abstract/221687
In November 1919, 8 separate experiments were conducted by Rosenau et al. in a group of 62 men trying to prove that influenza is contagious and causes disease. In all 8 experiments, 0/62 men became sick. Another set of 8 experiments were undertaken in December of 1919 by McCoy et al. in 50 men to try and prove contagion. Once again, all 8 experiments failed to prove people with influenza, or their bodily fluids cause illness. 0/50 men became sick. In 1919, Wahl et al. conducted 3 separate experiments to infect 6 healthy men with influenza by exposing them to mucous secretions and lung tissue from sick people. 0/6 men contracted influenza in any of the three studies.
https://www.jstor.org/stable/30082102?seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents
In 1920, Schmidt et al conducted two controlled experiments, exposing healthy people to the bodily fluids of sick people. Of 196 people exposed to the mucous secretions of sick people, 21 (10.7%) developed colds and three developed grippe (1.5%). In the second group, of the 84 healthy people exposed to mucous secretions of sick people, five developed grippe (5.9%) and four colds (4.7%). Of forty-three controls who had been inoculated with sterile physiological salt solutions eight (18.6%) developed colds. A higher percentage of people got sick after being exposed to saline compared to those being exposed to the “virus”.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19869857/ https://catalog.hathitrust.org/Record/102609951
In 1921, Williams et al. tried to experimentally infect 45 healthy men with the common cold and influenza, by exposing them to mucous secretions from sick people. 0/45 became ill.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19869857/
In 1924, Robertson & Groves exposed 100 healthy individuals to the bodily secretions from 16 different people suffering from influenza. The authors concluded that 0/100 became sick as a result of being exposed to the bodily secretions.
https://academic.oup.com/jid/article-abstract/34/4/400/832936?redirectedFrom=fulltextA
In 1930, Dochez et al. attempted to infect a group of men experimentally with the common cold. The authors stated in their results, something that is nothing short of amazing. “It was apparent very early that this individual was more or less unreliable and from the start it was possible to keep him in the dark regarding our procedure. He had inconspicuous symptoms after his test injection of sterile broth and no more striking results from the cold filtrate, until an assistant, on the second day after injection, inadvertently referred to this failure to contract a cold. That evening and night the subject reported severe symptomatology, including sneezing, cough, sore throat and stuffiness in the nose. The next morning he was told that he had been misinformed in regard to the nature of the filtrate and his symptoms subsided within the hour. It is important to note that there was an entire absence of objective pathological changes”.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19869798/
In 1937 Burnet & Lush conducted an experiment exposing 200 healthy people to bodily secretions from people infected with influenza. 0/200 became sick.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2065253/
Swine flu?…McBryde, Niles, and Moskey (1) made five attempts to pass the etiological agent of swine influenza through small Berkefeld or Mandler filters but were unable to reproduce the disease by dropping such filtrates into the nostrils of normal hogs. In two of these experiments, unfiltered material failed to produce the disease in their control animals. “Although these experiments are too few in number to be conclusive, they indicate that the CAUSATIVE AGENT of swine influenza is NOT a filtrable ‘VIRUS.’’
https://pdfslide.net/documents/swine-influenza-iii-filtration-experiments-and-etiology.html
Smallpox?. Dr. Rodermund, a physician in the state of Wisconsin, created a sensation by smearing his body with the exudate of smallpox sores in order to demonstrate to his medical colleagues that a healthy body could not be infected with the disease. He was arrested and quarantined in jail, but not before he had come into contact with many people. Not a single case of smallpox developed through this ‘exposure’’….”I have …handled intimately thousands of cases of contagious diseases, and I do not remember a single instance where any of us was the least affected by such contact Dr. Charles A.A. Campbell, MD of San Antonio, USA, who was for years in charge of an isolation hospital, made exhaustive experiments in order to demonstrate that smallpox is contagious, but found that this is not the case.
http://www.whale.to/a/rodermund.html
SARS Cov1? ALTHOUGH ONE CAN SPECULATE ABOUT THE POSSIBLE ROLES OF BOTH CORONAVIRUSES AND HUMAN METAPNEUMOVIRUS IN SARS, It is CURRENTLY NOT CLEAR WHAT ROLE, IF ANY, EITHER OF THESE VIRUSES HAS IN CAUSING SARS. FURTHER COLLABORATIVE INVESTIGATIONS ARE NEEDED.“ “THE MECHANISM OF TRANSMISSION OF THE AGENT OR AGENTS CAUSING SARS IS NOT YET UNDERSTOOD.” “We WERE NOT, HOWEVER, ABLE TO DEMONSTRATE CORONAVIRUS ANTIGENS IN PATIENT TISSUES BY HISTOLOGIC AND IMMUNOHISTOCHEMICAL METHODS OR TO DEMONSTRATE A DIRECT INVOLVEMENT IN THE PATHOLOGIC PROCESS. NEITHER WERE WE ABLE TO DEMONSTRATE SARS-ASSOCIATED CORONAVIRUS INFECTION IN ALL SUSPECTED PATIENTS WITH SARS.”
https://www.nejm.org/doi/10.1056/NEJMoa030781
The evidence SUGGESTS. There is no direct evidence of human-to-human transmission of “SARS-COV-2” from respiratory transmission. Everything that has come out is indirect evidence. DIRECT EVIDENCE is defined as evidence THAT DIRECTLY PROVES A KEY FACT AT ISSUE. INDIRECT EVIDENCE, also referred to as circumstantial evidence, is evidence that relies on an INFERENCE to connect it to a conclusion. There is NO DIRECT EVIDENCE of human-to-human transmission of “SARS-COV-2.” It is all INDIRECT EVIDENCE from which assumptions, hypotheses, and theories are drawn from and sold as conclusive.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7505025
“The ASSOCIATION between 2019-nCoV and the disease HAS NOT BEEN VERIFIED BY ANIMAL EXPERIMENTS TO FULFIL THE KOCH’S POSTULATES TO ESTABLISH A CAUSATIVE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN A MICROORGANISM AND A DISEASE.” 2/24/21
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2012-7
“Dr Rodermund, a physician in the state of Wisconsin, created a sensation by smearing his body with the exudate of smallpox sores in order to demonstrate to his medical colleagues that a healthy body could not be infected with the disease. He was arrested and quarantined in jail, but not before he had come into contact with many people. Not a single case of smallpox developed through this “exposure”….I have …handled intimately thousands of cases of contagious diseases, and I do not remember a single instance where any of us was the least affected by such contact.”
http://www.whale.to/a/rodermund.html
“For years Dr. Matthew J. Rodermund, MD of Wisconsin, USA, offered $10,000 to anyone who could prove scientifically that smallpox is contagious. Nobody ever claimed the money. Dr Charles A.A. Campbell, MD of San Antonio, USA, who was for years in charge of an isolation hospital made exhaustive experiments in order to demonstrate that smallpox is contagious, but found that this is not the case.”
http://www.whale.to/vaccines/infectiousness_smallpox_q.html
Dr. Rodermund experiment with smallpox
https://i.postimg.cc/FHvH0S0n/smallpox.jpg
Dr. Rodermund quote on Gods Law
https://i.postimg.cc/1R2rxvFk/Dr-Rodermund-quote.jpg
Smallpox: Dispelling A Popular Myth
Google Books on Human experiments prior to WWII
The Starry Cross details Spanish Flu
Subjected to Science: Human Experimentation in America Before the Second World War
https://books.google.com/books/about/Subjected_to_Science.html?id=6F2lmCfiy8gC
Journal of Medicine and Science 1899
The Journal of the American Medical Association
https://books.google.com/books/about/The_Journal_of_the_American_Medical_Asso.html?id=HvZGAQAAMAAJ