Bibliographic record
Abstract
This thesis is both an intellectual and social history of the strategies, activities, arguments and purported impact of the two Anti-vaccination Leagues that were active in Canada between 1872 and 1892. This work situates anti-vaccination reasoning within a broader framework of the Canadian experiences with smallpox, vaccine technology and vaccination science and medicine. The findings indicate that the standard depiction of anti-vaccinationism as part of a sanitary movement that rejected a 'reductionist' bacteriological system of medicine for a more holistic approach is overstated. The rejection or acceptance of a particular medical system did not strictly accord with the rejection or acceptance of vaccination. Some eclectic and homeopathic physicians in Canada accepted vaccination while regular physicians could and did reject it. In turn, anti-vaccinationists employed contemporary empirical methods and modes of analysis in their analysis of vaccine data. Their analysis of the empirical data is distinguishable from pro-vaccinationists only in its rejection of the principles of vaccination. Anti-vaccinationists felt that vaccine-immunity had not been demonstrated and this had serious consequences for how they read and understood empirical data. They argued that compulsory vaccination was a class-based legislation whose function was to exert control over the working classes. These arguments were successfully taken up by French nationalists in Montreal who used vaccination to promote discord between the French and English. By disseminating reports of serious side-effects from public vaccinators' vaccine, questioning the theoretical and empirical basis for vaccine programs and by adding the cultural argument that compulsory vaccination was a part of paternalistic and monopolistic medical profession, anti-vaccinationists both stimulated and reflected the wide-spread resistance to compulsory vaccination in the period of this study.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.027 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".