Study Shows This Amazingly Simple Act Reduces 2 Leading Childhood Diseases by 50% or More!

Gargabge outside Arms Street School office in Lyari, Karachi

Garbage collects outside of a school in Karachi, Pakistan.

It’s not black magic or some out-of-date belief—just good old-fashioned common sense.

Better hygiene, sanitation, and organic food are the foundations for good health. But to what degree could one of those elements (hygiene, for example) have an effect on decreasing a disease? I think finding the answer to this question and considering the evidence is valuable for parents who are considering vaccinating their children.

Why?

Mainstream health officials at the Centers for Disease Control and other such agencies in the United States use emotionally charged language to declare that vaccines—not better sanitation or hygiene— saved the world from deadly diseases.

It is for this reason that I must warn you: Those who push vaccines often trivialize or underestimate the information I am going to share with you. It completely destroys what they have been told for many years.

If you’re interested in learning more, read on.

The Gold Standard

The big secret vaccine peddlers avoid like the plague is, one amazingly simple act reduced two diseases by 50% or more. The most vital point to remember: The decrease in morbidity of—or the rate of incidence of a disease—those affected by the diseases had nothing to do with vaccines!

To get our answer, we turn to Karachi, Pakistan.

In 2002, a randomized controlled trial (a gold standard of scientific research) was performed by Dr. Stephen P. Luby in Karachi, Pakistan. The goal of the study was to assess the impact of hand washing and bathing with soap in settings where infectious diseases are leading causes of childhood disease and death. [1–3]

It is known as the Karachi Health Soap Study.

It’s noteworthy to keep in mind that the variable studied was hand washing—not improved sanitation (waste water treatment), clean drinking water, better food or storage, or even vaccines. In Karachi, sewage contaminates the drinking water and feces contaminates the environment. This is what makes the study so radically powerful!

If you want to see an overview of what was done, read on.

The Power of Simplicity and Education

Here are the some relevant facts you should know about the Karachi Health Soap Study[3]:

  • 25 neighborhoods were either given an antibacterial soap (containing 1.2% triclocarban) or plain soap.
  • 11 neighborhoods were the control. In other words, no hygiene promotion occurred, and no soap was dispensed in these neighborhoods.
  • Both the antibacterial soap and plain soap looked and smelled identical.
  • Both types of soap were packaged identically in generic white wrappers. Neither the fieldworkers nor the families knew whether the soaps were antibacterial or plain.
  • Fieldworkers reviewed with the families the health problems that resulted from contaminated hands and provided them with specific hand-washing instructions.
  • Fieldworkers encouraged households to wash their hands after defecation, after cleaning an infant who had defecated, before preparing food, before eating, and before feeding infants.
  • Fieldworkers encouraged participants to bathe once a day with soap and water.

Here’s what happened next…

Dramatic Decrease in Diseases

Remember my warning in the beginning of the article about the information being dismissed? As you will see, the results are very dramatic.

As noted by the study, in the first 6 months not much change or variation (only 6%) was noted between the different groups. In the graph below, the biggest change came in the second half of the year.

karachi-statistics

Source: Karachi Health Soap Study [3]

The results of the study were analyzed after 51 weeks.

  • Primary diarrhea outcomes in children younger than 15 years by intervention group
    • Antibacterial soap: 47% fewer incidences of diarrhea than control group
    • Plain soap: 52% fewer incidences of diarrhea than control group
  • Primary respiratory outcomes in children younger than 15 years by intervention group
    • Antibacterial soap: 45% fewer incidences of pneumonia than control group
    • Plain soap: 50% fewer incidences of pneumonia than control group

It is essential to reemphasize, the World Health Organization lists pneumonia (lower-respiratory infection) and diarrhea as the number 1 and number 2 diseases, which kill more than 3.5 million children worldwide each year. [3–5]

This seems to be in harmony with the principle that Antoine Bechamp—and even Weston Price—wrote about many years ago: The health of the host is everything. The disease is nothing. [6]

Considering that the people in the Karachi study drank the same water, ate the same foods, had the same indoor plumbing (or lack thereof), etc., a significant question has to be asked. If simple hand washing can decrease the morbidity of diarrhea and pneumonia by 50% or more, what happens when better sanitation facilities, food storage, and quality of food are introduced?

Even more important, I’d think there would be comparative data on the effectiveness of hand washing and vaccines. But if that were to happen—given the safety track record of soap versus vaccines—the entire vaccine program would receive a severe death blow.

What we know is when the standard of living increases, mortality and morbidity rates fall.

As an example, mortality rates (not morbidity) in the United States decreased prior to the introduction of vaccines (notice there was not a vaccine for scarlet fever).

united-states-mortality-rates

What could cause such an intense drop in mortality rates? It obviously wasn’t the vaccines. If vaccines caused a 50% drop in morbidity or mortality rate of a disease within a 6-month period, the media would broadcast it all over the news, singing the praises and benefits of getting injected.

The irony of this study is that the Centers for Disease Control provided some funding and reviewed the data. Here’s an excerpt from the study:

The balance of the funding was provided by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Inclusion of soap trade names is for identification only and does not imply endorsement by CDC or the Department of Health and Human Services. These data were presented in part at the International Conference on Emerging Infectious Diseases, Atlanta, GA, USA, in February, 2004. [3]

So, now you know that some people at the Centers for Disease Control know. But here’s the clincher.

Vaccine Pushers

The Centers for Disease Control recommend the following vaccines in the United States to prevent the very same diseases discussed above.

For diarrhea: RotaTeq® (RV5) and Rotarix® (RV1). [7]

For pneumonia: Pneumococcal, haemophilus influenzae type b (Hib), pertussis (whooping cough), varicella (chickenpox), measles, and influenza (flu) vaccine. [8]

Does the Centers for Disease Control mention washing hands as a means of prevention? Sure—in passing.

They say something to the effect that good hygiene is important, but is not enough to control the spread of the disease. They recommend vaccines.

handwashing-karachiThen again, you might want to consider why the CDC is so adamant about recommending vaccines. For example, this is from an article on Mercola.com:

Dr. Paul Offit of the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia earned millions of dollars as part of a $182-million sale by the hospital of its worldwide royalty interest in the Merck Rotateq vaccine … The high price placed on the patents raises concerns over Offit’s use of his former position on the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) to help create the market for rotavirus vaccine— effectively, to vote himself rich. [9]

Could the deep ties to the pharmaceutical companies be the reason the CDC puts more emphasis on vaccines? Considering the evidence presented in the Karachi Health Soap Study, which would you choose—better hygiene or a vaccine?

Conclusion

What’s the moral of the story?

The data revealed by Stephen P. Luby in the Karachi Health Soap Study is nothing short of spectacular. Children who washed their hands and skin with plain soap had 52% less diarrhea and 50% less pneumonia. Good hygiene has a significant impact on decreasing disease, and I think it is something we take for granted in the United States.

Please remember this point: If better nutrition and sanitation were added as components of this or a future study, I suspect that Karachi, Pakistan, would see a more dramatic drop in diseases, much like in the United States—and I would highly encourage such efforts.

Just imagine the implications of a comparative study being performed between hygiene practices and vaccines for decreasing disease. What do you think the outcome would be? My money would be on hygiene practices being the clear winner.

Here’s the shocking reality.

You hold in your hands the real power and master key to good health. It doesn’t come through the tip of a needle.

 

References

  1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Randomized_controlled_trial
  2. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Levels_of_evidence
  3. Luby, Stephen P., Mubina Agboatwalla, Daniel R. Feikin, John Painter, Ward Billhimer, Arshad Altaf, and Robert M. Hoekstra.“Effect of Handwashing on Child Health: A Randomised Controlled Trial.” The Lancet 366, no. 9481 (July 16, 2005): 225–233. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(05)66912-7. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16023513
  4. WHO Pneumonia Fact Sheet: http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs331/en/
  5. WHO Diarrhoeal Fact Sheet: http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs330/en/
  6. http://www.naturalnews.com/030384_Louis_Pasteur_disease.html
  7. http://www.cdc.gov/rotavirus/about/prevention.html
  8. http://www.cdc.gov/Features/Pneumonia/
  9. http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2009/06/25/vaccine-doctor-given-at-least-30-million-dollars-to-push-vaccines.aspx

 

Important Note to Readers

We are publishing this information to educate Congress, the media, and the public regarding issues affecting the health and well-being of our citizens. It is not our intention to infringe upon anyone’s copyright. We believe we have used the U.S. Copyright’s Doctrine of Fair Use equitably and without incurring infringement or plagiarism.

 

  • Patrons99

    Great post, Jeffry – It’s time for a paradigm shift !
                       
    What if the “terrain” was everything? Within the last 3 years, it’s become quite clear that protein and DNA structure is slaved to interfacial water structure. Interfacial water tension dominates the shape of the free energy surface. IMHO, it’s time for a major paradigm shift in dealing with infectious diseases and diseases in general. Science has caught up with Pasteur’s germ theory. Frauenfelder, H.; Chen, G.; Berendzen, J.; Fenimore, P. W.; Jansson, H.; McMahon, B. H.; Stroe, I. R.; Swenson, J.; Young, R. D., A unified model of protein dynamics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 2009. Combet, S.; Zanotti, J.-M., Further evidence that interfacial water is the main “driving force” of protein dynamics: a neutron scattering study on perdeuterated C-phycocyanin. Physical Chemistry Chemical Physics 2012, 14 (14), 4927-4934.

  • Merryberry3stars

    Brilliant. Articles like this really help to calm our worries about our decision not to vaccinate our child. We know the truth, but need reminding very often due to so many people trying to convince us that we are wrong. Thank you.

  • ponerology

    Cleanliness is next to Godliness.

  • betsyanne

    You should not use wikipedia as a reference.  WIkipedia information can be changed at any time by anyone and thus is not very reliable as a source.  I know a lot of people use Wiki, but they really shouldn’t.

  • Mawps2love

    Thank you for sharing this information.  I am the only one where I work now, out of approximately 150 employees, who did not receive the influenza vaccine this year, which, by the way was made mandatory this year.  Mandatory with an exemption or lose your job.  I had been there twenty years and only received the vaccine twice during those twenty years at their prodding.  Had a reaction both times so my physician wrote me an exemption.  The real kicker to this story ~ out of all who have been vaccinated, as I repeat, except me, I am the only one required to wear a mask at all times while at work.  I respect those I with with and work for, but I cannot help to ask why when they are protected by taking the vaccine am I the one who has to wear the mask so they are protected from me.  

  • Mawps2love

     Wow, Jeffry ~ maybe you best dumb your comments down for most of us.  I do not have a clue what point you are making.  Sorry to be so uneducated, but I would love to understand. 

  • Patrons99

    We’ve been
    brainwashed by large corporate interests into thinking that germs cause
    disease. Germs don’t cause disease. Interfacial water stress causes disease. The
    initial common pathway to inflammation, disease, and sudden death, is purely
    biophysical. Real science has caught up with Pasteur’s germ theory. It’s been
    derailed. It’s untenable, scientifically.  

    “If I could live my
    life over again, I would devote it to proving that germs seek their natural
    habitat—diseased tissue—rather than being the cause of the diseased tissue;
    e.g., mosquitoes seek the stagnant water, but do not cause the pool to become
    stagnant.” — Rudolph Virchow (Father of Pathology).

    I suggest reading “The
    Blood and its Third Element” by Professor Antoine Bechamp (1816-1908), who declared
    Pasteur’s germ theory as the “greatest scientific silliness of the age.
    I also suggest
    reading “Curse of Louis Pasteur” by Nancy Appleton, PhD, 1999.
    None of us can
    afford to be intellectually lazy on a topic of such great importance to public
    health.
    “The great
    enemy of the truth is very often not the lie — deliberate, contrived and
    dishonest, but the myth, persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic. Belief in
    myths allows the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought.” ~
    John F. Kennedy, 35th president of US 1961-1963 (1917 – 1963)

    Promotion by pharma and the orthodox medical establishment of the myths of
    vaccine-induced “herd immunity” and “vaccine-preventable”
    diseases allows the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought.

  • Argus

    Mawps2love, I don’t think Jefffrey could make this article any dumber.  It may be his dumbest one yet.
     
    First he makes the claim that healthcare workers don’t want people to know that handwashing and good hygiene reduces the spread of diseases – they want this to be secret – ludicrous!
     
    Then he trots out a study of the effect of improving hygeine in an area with contaminated groundwater and other sanitation problems.  Not surprisingly, it shows a big improvement in reducing incidence of diarrhea and pneumonia.  But what does this tell us about vaccines? Not a thing.  These conditions are caused by many different organisms – many of which are not covered by vaccines because it is so easy to control their spread with good hygeine.
     
    Then of course, there is the notion that reducing the incidence by 50% or so as from the methods in this study is all we should strive for.  I’m glad that public health officials in developed countries have higher standards in mind.
     
    Finally, Jeffrey pulls the old bait and switch routine of showing us s mortality graph while trying too make us think it also represents morbidity (incidence) of a disease.What that graph really illustrates is that improvements in medical care over time increased the likeliehood of surviving a disease – not the same as never having it in the first place.
     
    I could go on – but that’s enough for now.

  • Patrons99

    Mawps2love – Your point is well-taken! Here’s a very cool read, an article by a physicist, Richard Feynmann, from 1960,
    that is accessible to everyone.
     
    http://calteches.library.caltech.edu/47/2/1960Bottom.pdf
     
    VERY INTERESTING where he uses the word machine
    and slave. Search for the words in the PDF file. You’ll see. IMHO, he foretold structured water. Very sophisticated spectroscopic techniques have fairly recently been brought to bear to show that water structure drives protein and DNA structure. Disrupt water structure with chemical and biologic intoxicants(xenobiotics), and you predispose to inflammation, disease, and sudden death.

    Davidson, R.M.; Seneff, S. The Initial Common Pathway of Inflammation, Disease, and Sudden Death. Entropy 2012, 14, 1399-1442. 
     
     http://www.mdpi.com/1099-4300/14/8/1399

  • Aquarius Freedom

    It’s worse than that. Wikipedia is monitored by people with mainstream agendas and will quickly reverse any edit you make that does not support their views. Just try adding info on vaccine dangers, and see how fast it’s deleted.

  • betsyanne

    Which is precisely why I said it shouldn’t be used as a source for reference material.  Especially not for an article on a subject as controversial as vaccinations.  I don’t even vaccinate my dog, but that’s my own choice after hours  of research on my own.  But I do not rely on any info from wikipedia (in fact, I try never to click on anything involving wikipedia) because the information is so unreliable.  As you say, it’s monitored by people with an agenda.  Same with anything dealing with raw milk on wiki.  The dudes from the commerical dairy industry will do almost ANYTHING to keep people believing that pasteurized milk is just wonderful stuff. 

    Chances are if you want truth, you won’t get it from wikipedia.  Find different source materials.

  • http://vactruth.com Jeffry John Aufderheide

    Wikipedia was used to introduce the reader to two terms — Randomized Control Study and Levels of Evidence. If someone wants to look them up further for their own edification, I saw no problem putting the references to the website.

    However, I do agree with your statement — the information on the site has been changed in the past. Thank you for pointing this out.

  • http://vactruth.com Jeffry John Aufderheide

    You are welcome.

  • http://vactruth.com Jeffry John Aufderheide

    Thank you, @3f52a8ae3ec0d4b563402a095600ae66:disqus. Another resource you may find interesting is this one: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK2475/

  • http://vactruth.com Jeffry John Aufderheide

    You certainly recognize the point, Argus — hygiene can prevent many of the conditions. I think you’re proving my point — you deny and/or minimize the impact of sanitation, better food, hygiene, etc. in the United States and any relationship in the decrease of mortality rates. Your statement implies medical care over time increased survivability was the only reason.

  • Patrons99

    If vaccines promote a systemic inflammatory response, either individually or in combination, does the inflammatory response sensitize and predispose to INFECTION by pathogens that we are exposed to, either iatrogenically or idiopathically, both retrospectively and prospectively, in the environment? Suppose that Pasteur’s germ theory was fundamentally flawed? What if the “terrain” was everything? I do not advocate elimination of all vaccines and synthetic drugs. I do advocate an open-mind as to their use, however. Again, I draw the line at mandates. Their safety and efficacy should not be taken for granted. There are far too many horror stories. I support the tenets of integrative, complementary, and alternative medicine, which frankly, have shown a better track record of safety than allopathy.

    http://www.nlm.nih.gov/hmd/greek/greek_oath.html

  • Rottielover_ats

    ok I’m 100% anti-vaccine but you can’t convince people or be taken seriously by citing wikipedia!

  • Lou

     Wiki is a 100% disinformation source. Wiki MOST of the time will spit out easily verified truth but when verification is VERY important and difficult wiki will often mislead.

  • Argus

    To Jeffry (below):

    What exactly is the point you are trying to make with this article? In one or two sentences.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Lowell-Hubbs/1285214003 Lowell Hubbs

    Certainly you can read the conclusion to the article, Argus? If that doesn’t make any sense to you, perhaps you should get tested for your reading comprehension level, and take an appropriate level of reading classes to help you improve your far less than adequate comprehension ability. Your little as well what resembles a 2nd grade level book report on this article, is pathetic and does not in any way accurately represent what actually exists for information in this article. But then, how can you comprehend anything that you intentionally refuse to comprehend; simply just because it does not support your in denial parroting of the pro-vaccine brainwashed and to much to lose agenda.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Lowell-Hubbs/1285214003 Lowell Hubbs

    Here is something you may as well not have a clue about, Mawpslove. There have never been any actual vaccine aluminum adjuvant safety studies. Please go to the CDC and or the Paul Offit, CHOP site and see it you can find me one, and then come back here and reply post that? I prefer that they also be published in Pubmed, the same as most of these studies have been on these two pages below; which show the direct mechanisms of vaccine aluminum adjuvant harm, and as well the connection to ASD. I would ask you as well why the CDC has refused to address that aluminum adjuvant issue, other than to falsely claim with no physiological nor biological science to back it, that dietary injection is the same thing as injected forms. 

    Why has the CDC not done any appropriate follow up studies? They have without any safety data, ignored and stone walled this issue for now 80 some years. Is that long enough?

    In comparison, this is the equivalent of, and just like the ADA has done for the last 100 years, regarding silver mercury amalgam tooth fillings; and they too still claim them to be safe and effective. For example; prior to placement, any excess amalgam must be disposed of as hazardous waste. If 30 years later, that said filling is removed and replaced; that same filling taken out, is again by EPA guidelines then again considered hazardous waste, and must be disposed of accordingly. It can not be just thrown in the garbage. So, the only safe place for classified hazardous waste, is in the human mouth? Does that and should that make any sense?

    Perhaps you as well have an answer as to why these trade organizations such as the ADA, CDC, and the FDA; are allowed to be literally answerable to anyone and any source from an unbiased scientific perspective? Where are there ever any checks and balances in this corrupt approval of injected and/ or swallowed and/ or inhaled neurologically toxic substances, and that in regard to the medical and/ or dental so called professions? A situation that has obviously been taking place?

    http://www.vacfacts.info/the-vaccine-damage—science.html

    http://www.vacfacts.info/aluminum-vaccine-adjuvants.html

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/David-Salter/620346940 David Salter

     And godliness is next to war-iness, bigotry-ness, genocide-iness, rape-iness. Take your irrational worldview elswhere please.

  • Eoghan

    Rottielover_ats, you slated citing wikipedia.
    The Wikipedia references are in relation to the PROCESS of SCIENCE in general. It’s the http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16023513 that seems to be the important one.

    Also, anyone who wants to read about the medical profession’s denial of the importance of HANDWASHING, despite later adopting it, go to…

    http://www.accessexcellence.org/AE/AEC/CC/hand_background.php

    “As early as 1843, Dr. Oliver Wendell Holmes advocated handwashing to prevent childbed fever”

  • ponerology

    Stop with your knee-jerk, programmed reaction. You’re the one with the “world” view. My view is personal. Take your view (which appears to be that of Charles Darwin whose father and grandfather wrote the same stuff before him but who were not “authorized” to publish it widely) and gird your loins because Darwin didn’t like “your kind” either.  
    What are you doing on this site?
    Aren’t you more about furthering the goals of Golomb (RAND) and Hitchens and other such eugenicists?

  • Amy

    Just cause Davids parentage hung from trees shouldn’t mean we can’t treat him like a human.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1218480780 Carrie Gill

    My government funded hospital is thinking of doing the exact same thing – even for those of us who do not have patient interaction. Mandating flu vaccines just proves the lack of education – no proof of effectiveness but they will do it anywhat.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1218480780 Carrie Gill

    One thing you might want to research… OSHA is against mandating the vaccine because employees then think they DO NOT have to follow basic precautions such as handwashing. :)

  • mawps2love@gmail.com

    Carrie, what amazes me is that after all the research I have done over the
    past few years I just do not understand why the medical community refuses to look at the other evidence. They seem to think it is all bogus. I
    can also say that more than half of our employees have come down with
    respiratory illnesses including one that was actually diagnosed with Influenza A. Please know that I do not say this pride fully, but thankfully that the two of us who were not vaccinated have not been sick thus far. I feel this is only going to continue to get worse each year and I am even beginning to suspect they will eventually not allow exemptions for medical reasons. I know there are many of us out there who do not want to take the flu shot, but I cannot understand why our voices are not being heard. Many are taking it for fear of losing their jobs. One of our employees who had never taken the shot, was nursing a baby, and had never had the flu or even been ill as far as I know, is now ill and missed work. She held off on taking the vaccine until the last day before she would have been terminated. She is the sole provider for her husband and two children. Would she be ill if she had not taken the shot? We do not know, but I suspect she would have not. I will check out the OSHA information. Thank you for your support.