The Doctor Who Beat The British General Medical Council 1, page-139

No, I don't really hate anything. But it isn't right when someone is lionised for something that isn't true, that he carefully constructed and defended against all the evidence.

He had very good reason to know that Phipps was most unlikely to be infected with smallpox. He was a tuberculous boy, and it was known that tuberculous subjects wouldn't take variolation. He minimised his risks there.

But it seems that failures were successes too, so who cared? Here is a list of 14 cases from the Manchester Infirmary related in the Med. and Phys. Journ., ii. 134, paper dated 12th July, 1799. The surgeon thought these were great results:

Case I.— 16th April, girl aged 7, successful vaccination (oblong vesicle on 13th day, full of limpid fluid and surrounded by areola) ; was thereafter inoculated with smallpox, and had the disease in the confluent form (1600 to 1800 pustules).
Case II.—Infant aged nine months, brother of No. i. Successful vaccination at two points (one healed on 15th day, other covered by crust, which became a superficial ulcer after the 21st day and yielded ichor up to the 32nd day). Caught the smallpox from his sister, and had about 50 pustules, mostly on his face, which began to show about the 35th day from his vaccination.
CASE III.—Aged 5 months. Vaccination did not hold. Variolation did hold.
Case IV.—Aged 5 years. Did not take vaccine. Did not take smallpox after two trials by inoculation.
Case V.—Aged 9 months. Did not take vaccine. Did not take smallpox at twice.
Case VI.—Aged 3 years. Did not take vaccine. Did not take smallpox. Variolation had failed, beyond local inflammation, when tried four months before.
CASE VII.—Aged 5 months. Vaccination failed, though tried twice. Variolation failed, but arm swelled.
CASE VIII.—Aged 16 months. Successful vaccination (areola on nth day, very extensive, with much fever). Variolated on the 29th day, without result.
CASE IX.—Aged 19 weeks. Successful vaccination (slight vaccinal eruption on arm). Variolated on the 12th day, local pustule on the 19th day, eruption (of thirty pustules) on the 22nd day.
CASE X.—Aged 14 weeks. Inoculated from Case i., evidently with the coexistent smallpox matter mistaken for cowpox. Sickened on 7th day, eruption of smallpox on 10th, full burden on 12th, but not confluent. Variolated on the 14th day without result.
Case XI.—Aged 9 months. Also inoculated from Case i. (complicated with smallpox), with same result as in Case x.
Cases XII., XIII, and XIV.—Results not known.

Doctors in Stroud had a 9 out of 10 failure rate. The only patient who didn't get smallpox when exposed to it was the one who didn't react to the cowpox. No wonder vaccines aren't subject to proper testing - 215 years ago they knew that proper testing worked against them - as cowpox didn't protect against smallpox.

The whole thing was a fraud from the word go, pushed through by a well connected man whose only claim to be "scientific" was an observation that it was the young cuckoo who pushed the other eggs and chicks out of the nest. On that basis he, through his friends, got elected to the RS. After which, when anyone dared question anything he said or did, he told them they were arguing with a scientific man, a Fellow of the Royal Society no less.

Cuckoos to government funded vaccine hero.

Animals with breasts to government funded climate hero.

I would have though the connection was obvious.