You are astoundingly wrong...
Epidemiology — The polio epidemics that occurred in the first half of the 20th century in the United States were, ironically, a result of improved sanitation. Prior to 1900 in the United States, polio was endemic. Most infants were infected with poliovirus before age six months. While some developed infantile paralysis, many were protected by maternal antibodies and had inapparent infections, resulting in widespread immunity in American children. Improved sanitation led to many less infants being exposed to poliovirus, creating a large pool of susceptible individuals. When exposure occurred later and the individuals were not protected by maternal antibodies, there were polio epidemics.
In 1952, there were 57,000 reported cases of polio [4,5]. This number included paralytic, nonparalytic, and unspecified cases; paralytic cases peaked at over 21,000 that year [6]. With the introduction of Salk inactivated poliovirus vaccine (IPV) in 1955, the number of cases rapidly declined to under 2,500 cases in 1957. By 1965, only 61 cases of paralytic polio were reported.
So wait, improved sanitation actually made polio worse? Huh, isn't that interesting. And in 1952 (you know, when we had decent nutrition and sanitation in this country), around 35% of polio cases resulted in paralysis. Man, it sucks that we've essentially eradicated this disease in the US.
Background
In the decade before the live measles vaccine was licensed in 1963, an average of 549,000 measles cases and 495 measles deaths were reported annually in the United States. However, it is likely that, on average, 3 to 4 million people were infected with measles annually; most cases were not reported. Of the reported cases, approximately 48,000 people were hospitalized from measles and 1,000 people developed chronic disability from acute encephalitis caused by measles annually.
So in the late 50s/early 60s (again, we had good sanitation and decent diet back then), 1/11 people who got measles ended up in the hospital. Its really a shame that we did away with that.
In infants younger than 12 months of age who get pertussis, about half are hospitalized. Hospitalization is most common in infants younger than 6 months of age. Of those infants who are hospitalized with pertussis approximately:
- 61% will have apnea
- 23% get pneumonia
- 1.1% will have seizures
- 1% will die
- 0.3% will have encephalopathy (as a result of hypoxia from coughing or possibly from toxin)
So even at present day, 0.5% of kids under a year old will die from pertussis. And a full 50% end up in the hospital. I can't see why we'd try and prevent that.
Before the availability of pertussis vaccine in the 1940s, more than 200,000 cases of pertussis were reported annually. Since widespread use of the vaccine began, incidence has decreased more than 75% compared with the pre-vaccine era.
However, since the 1980s there's been an increase in the number of reported cases of pertussis. In 2012, the last peak year, 48,277 cases of pertussis were reported
Using these numbers, pre-vaccine (1940s, good sanitation and OK diet) we're talking 1,000 deaths. Nowadays, we're seeing more like 240. Its too bad, those extra 760 babies really just shouldn't be here.
I could do on, but I think I've made my point. The evidence is not on your side whatsoever. Talk to people who have had these diseases (you know, the baby boomers) and see if they would have preferred a vaccine to actually getting the disease.
