I'm not much of a fan of posts that provide inaccurate summaries of the material they purport to present.
Mary Mallon was a serial recividist offender.
"From 1900 to 1907, Mallon worked as a cook in the New York City area for eight families, seven of whom contracted typhoid.[11][12] In 1900, she worked in Mamaroneck, New York, where withi…
I'm not much of a fan of posts that provide inaccurate summaries of the material they purport to present.
Mary Mallon was a serial recividist offender.
"From 1900 to 1907, Mallon worked as a cook in the New York City area for eight families, seven of whom contracted typhoid.[11][12] In 1900, she worked in Mamaroneck, New York, where within two weeks of her employment, residents developed typhoid fever. In 1901, she moved to Manhattan, where members of the family for whom she worked developed fevers and diarrhea, and the laundress died. Mallon then went to work for a lawyer and left after seven of the eight people in that household became ill.[13][14]
In June 1904, she was hired by a prosperous lawyer, Henry Gilsey. Within a week, the laundress was infected with typhoid, and soon four of the seven servants were ill. No members of Gilsey's family were infected, because they resided separately, and the servants lived in their own house. The investigator Dr. R. L. Wilson concluded that the laundress had caused the outbreak, but he failed to prove it. Immediately after the outbreak began, Mallon left and moved to Tuxedo Park,[15] where she was hired by George Kessler. Two weeks later, the laundress in his household was infected and taken to St. Joseph's Regional Medical Center, where her case of typhoid was the first in a long time.[10]
In August 1906, Mallon took a position in Oyster Bay on Long Island with the family of a wealthy New York banker, Charles Henry Warren. Mallon went along with the Warrens when they rented a house in Oyster Bay for the summer of 1906. From August 27 to September 3, six of the 11 people in the family came down with typhoid fever. The disease at that time was "unusual" in Oyster Bay, according to three medical doctors who practiced there. The landlord, understanding that it would be impossible to rent a house with the reputation of typhoid, hired several independent experts to find the source of infection. They took water samples from pipes, faucets, toilets, and the cesspool, all of which were negative for typhoid...[16][17][18
More details are available, if people take the time to read it for themselves rather than accepting your preposterous twisting of the facts. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Mallon
One more case: "In 1915, Mallon started working at Sloane Hospital for Women in New York City. Soon 25 people were infected, and two died. The head obstetrician, Dr. Edward B. Cragin, called Soper and asked him to help in the investigation. Soper identified Mallon from the servants' verbal descriptions and also by her handwriting.[36][39]"
Mallon eventually being sentenced- after multiple offenses- to the equivalent of life without parole in NYC's quarantine camp was arguably excessive. But that wasn't your initial point, was it?
Your point was about someone who "did what he thought was right for himself, in spite of others.
no, I'm fine with you disgracing yourself like a truculent adolescent, out loud and in public.
You offered your capsule summary of the Wiki article, and I provided some actual excerpts, as a corrective. After that, it's out of my hands. The readers can use their reading comprehension skills as best they can to judge who has the better of the argument.
That's all I can do, after all. I can't inject those skills into people.
Can you really disgrace yourself posting under a pen name on a comment section in a relatively secluded part of the internet populated by strangers?
In any case, so your big Wikipedia link drop went over like a wet fart. It's OK. We all look like pretentious cunts now and again.
Fact is this. Matthew did what he thought was right based on the information he had at the time. So did Mary - along with the folks that threw her in jail.
But here's the thing with history... you can't judge people in their time and place based on what you know now. It's much more valuable to see what lessons there might be - to understand what happened, and why. In this particular instance, the problem wasn't Mary's unwillingness to "comply" but that time's ignorance to basic things we now take for granted.
In another words, Mascot, they threw her in jail due to ignorance. Of course they couldn't have known any better, but don't pretend your Wikipedia link drop is any kind of final word on complying with government orders and the individual's right to decide what's best for them.
Should our friend Matthew be infamous enough to warrant his own Wikipedia page a 100 years from now, I sincerely hope its readers approach it in a similar way... and not just for winning an argument on the internet.
I'm not much of a fan of posts that provide inaccurate summaries of the material they purport to present.
Mary Mallon was a serial recividist offender.
"From 1900 to 1907, Mallon worked as a cook in the New York City area for eight families, seven of whom contracted typhoid.[11][12] In 1900, she worked in Mamaroneck, New York, where within two weeks of her employment, residents developed typhoid fever. In 1901, she moved to Manhattan, where members of the family for whom she worked developed fevers and diarrhea, and the laundress died. Mallon then went to work for a lawyer and left after seven of the eight people in that household became ill.[13][14]
In June 1904, she was hired by a prosperous lawyer, Henry Gilsey. Within a week, the laundress was infected with typhoid, and soon four of the seven servants were ill. No members of Gilsey's family were infected, because they resided separately, and the servants lived in their own house. The investigator Dr. R. L. Wilson concluded that the laundress had caused the outbreak, but he failed to prove it. Immediately after the outbreak began, Mallon left and moved to Tuxedo Park,[15] where she was hired by George Kessler. Two weeks later, the laundress in his household was infected and taken to St. Joseph's Regional Medical Center, where her case of typhoid was the first in a long time.[10]
In August 1906, Mallon took a position in Oyster Bay on Long Island with the family of a wealthy New York banker, Charles Henry Warren. Mallon went along with the Warrens when they rented a house in Oyster Bay for the summer of 1906. From August 27 to September 3, six of the 11 people in the family came down with typhoid fever. The disease at that time was "unusual" in Oyster Bay, according to three medical doctors who practiced there. The landlord, understanding that it would be impossible to rent a house with the reputation of typhoid, hired several independent experts to find the source of infection. They took water samples from pipes, faucets, toilets, and the cesspool, all of which were negative for typhoid...[16][17][18
More details are available, if people take the time to read it for themselves rather than accepting your preposterous twisting of the facts. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Mallon
One more case: "In 1915, Mallon started working at Sloane Hospital for Women in New York City. Soon 25 people were infected, and two died. The head obstetrician, Dr. Edward B. Cragin, called Soper and asked him to help in the investigation. Soper identified Mallon from the servants' verbal descriptions and also by her handwriting.[36][39]"
Mallon eventually being sentenced- after multiple offenses- to the equivalent of life without parole in NYC's quarantine camp was arguably excessive. But that wasn't your initial point, was it?
Your point was about someone who "did what he thought was right for himself, in spite of others.
You know that's OK, right?"
What's the matter?
Mad I'm not complying with the lesson I was supposed to learn?
no, I'm fine with you disgracing yourself like a truculent adolescent, out loud and in public.
You offered your capsule summary of the Wiki article, and I provided some actual excerpts, as a corrective. After that, it's out of my hands. The readers can use their reading comprehension skills as best they can to judge who has the better of the argument.
That's all I can do, after all. I can't inject those skills into people.
Can you really disgrace yourself posting under a pen name on a comment section in a relatively secluded part of the internet populated by strangers?
In any case, so your big Wikipedia link drop went over like a wet fart. It's OK. We all look like pretentious cunts now and again.
Fact is this. Matthew did what he thought was right based on the information he had at the time. So did Mary - along with the folks that threw her in jail.
But here's the thing with history... you can't judge people in their time and place based on what you know now. It's much more valuable to see what lessons there might be - to understand what happened, and why. In this particular instance, the problem wasn't Mary's unwillingness to "comply" but that time's ignorance to basic things we now take for granted.
In another words, Mascot, they threw her in jail due to ignorance. Of course they couldn't have known any better, but don't pretend your Wikipedia link drop is any kind of final word on complying with government orders and the individual's right to decide what's best for them.
Should our friend Matthew be infamous enough to warrant his own Wikipedia page a 100 years from now, I sincerely hope its readers approach it in a similar way... and not just for winning an argument on the internet.