To what extent were vaccines responsible for the lowered rates of measles, whooping cough, smallpox, typhoid fever, enteric fever, typhus, scarlet fever and tuberculosis? According to Roman Bystrianyk, not much.

Who is Roman Bystrianyk? Excerpt from Grok:

Roman Bystrianyk is a researcher, author, and software engineer known for his work questioning mainstream narratives about vaccines and infectious diseases. He co-authored Dissolving Illusions: Disease, Vaccines, and the Forgotten History with Suzanne Humphries, MD, which argues that the decline in infectious disease mortality in the 19th and early 20th centuries was primarily due to improved sanitation, nutrition, and living conditions rather than medical interventions like vaccines.

Take a look at this chart, then see his Tweet below:

Imagine a massive drop in all infectious diseases—measles, whooping cough, smallpox, typhoid fever, enteric fever, typhus, and especially the biggest killers of the time: scarlet fever and tuberculosis. All of them began to decline around the same time, steadily trending toward zero—with or without vaccines. Smallpox, once feared, became as mild as chickenpox, even as vaccination rates fell.

When we zoom in on the New England states—an area known for better living conditions and access to healthcare—the story becomes even clearer. In 1962, measles-related deaths were almost nonexistent across all six states:

Connecticut: 0 deaths

Maine: 1 death

Massachusetts: 0 deaths

New Hampshire: 0 deaths

Rhode Island: 1 death

Vermont: 3 deaths

Yet we’re still told that vaccines were the main reason for the decline—even though there was never a national vaccination program for scarlet fever or tuberculosis, the diseases that had taken the most lives. And the vaccines for the diseases we hear about nonstop didn’t show up until after the death rates had already dropped by nearly 100%.

Does really looking at the data and history give you a different perspective on vaccination?