This section is from the "Nature Cure: Philosophy and Practice Based on the Unity of Disease and Cure" book, by Henry Lindlahr.
At present the trend of allopathic medical science is undoubtedly toward the serum, antitoxin and vaccine treatment. Practically all medical research tends that way. Every few days we see in the daily papers reports of new serums and antitoxins which are claimed to cure or create immunity to certain diseases.
Suppose the research and practice of medical science continue along these lines and are generally accepted or, as the medical associations would have it, forced upon the public by law. What would be the result? Before a child reached the years of adolescence, it would have had injected into its blood the vaccines, serums, and antitoxins of smallpox, hydrophobia, tetanus (lockjaw), cerebro-spinal meningitis, typhoid fever, diphtheria, pneumonia, scarlet fever, etc.
If allopathy were to have its way, the blood of the adult would be a mixture of dozens of filthy bacterial extracts, disease taints and destructive drug poisons. The tonsils and adenoids, the appendix vermiformis and probably a few other parts of the human anatomy would be extirpated in early youth under compulsion of the health departments.
What is more rational and sensible: the endeavor to produce immunity to disease by making the human body the breeding ground for all sorts of antibacteria and antipoisons, or to create natural immunity by building up the blood on a normal basis, purifying the body of morbid matter and poisons, correcting mechanical lesions and by cultivating the right mental attitude? Which one of these methods is more likely to be disease-building, which health-building?
Just imagine what human blood will be like in coming generations if this artificial contamination with all sorts of disease taints and drug poisons is to be forced upon the people!