WHO Changes Definition of “Herd Immunity” to Eliminate Pre-COVID Consensus
“ The World Health Organization has changed the definition of “herd immunity,” eliminating the pre-COVID consensus that it could be achieved by allowing a virus to spread through a population, and insisting that herd immunity comes solely from vaccines.”
9June2020
when a population is immune either through vaccination or immunity developed through previous infection
13November2020
if a threshold of vaccination is reached.
The WHO is a criminal organization that helped me make a some good gains in 2020. I listened when they said not to worry about the virus escaping China or being passed person-to-person and I went home and sold a majority of my stock portfolio. Then, I researched the doctor who was in charge of public relations for Trump regarding the pandemic and dumped a lot of that newfound liquidity into the company he had ties to that had not yet ever created anything, but was using technology he was involved in to rush a COVID vaccine into circulation. Thank you Federal government. Thank you Fauci. Thank you WHO. I can't wait to learn more things from you all. I think Biden will really create some profitable opportunities. Well...he already has in areas like fuel cells, solar and marijuana. But, he hasn't taken office yet so this has only been an appetizer. 2021 will surely be a great year!
“Come to me, ye sheep. Give unto me your wealth and your freedom, and I will provide you your needs and happiness. Just believe in me, your government.”
-- Ronald Reagan
Congress) but not the self serving bureaucrats.
The strain that caused the famous Spanish flu of 1918 didn’t go away. I’ve had it. A lot of us have. Did you get the flu in the 2009 flu pandemic? If so, there is a high chance you have as well.
That particular strain has come back twice that I recall. But most people don’t know about it. For them it is “just a flu”. Or they know it as H1N1 or “swine flu.” It was even detected in swine back then as well.
There is a heavy dose of misinformation about that one. It wasn’t because we didn’t know better. And the idea of it “coming back” and being even worse than it was is equally absurd ignorance. There is a connection between those two statements.
Something else was going on in 1918. War. You can trace the spread of it around military troop transfers. From there it spread out all hub-and-spoke like. Which is why the claim of “but today we have air travel” is weak. Guess how it spread in 1918? Yup - air travel.
Of course, the fact that it has come back twice and been a footnote at best is pretty strong evidence of my assertion that the claim of it being devastating “if it ever came back” is bull. 😛
Now as to why it wasn’t a big deal. Passed down herd immunity. Which is where the irony is. Some types of immunity is sort of hereditary. Not in the sense of genetic memory but from mother to child during passage through the birth canal.
This is one of the reasons why that flu pandemic didn’t hit elderly as hard as it usually did - they had here immunity as a population due to prior “exposure”. As one would reasonably surmise, that effect dilutes over successive generations.
And finally H1N1 is still circulating as one of the common seasonal flu strains. One final note on 2009’s pandemic - the vaccine came well after the main thrust of it had already passed.
It isn’t a binary, and it isn’t the same across different viruses either. Some may only need 60% of the herd to have resistance while others may need that level to be in the 90s. That is part of what has been missing this time in the discussion.
Vaccines have be a tremendous aid in establishing the needed herd immunity, but they are far from required across the board.
Basically it is achieved when a high enough percentage of the herd (cows were the origin IIRC) has an immunity (though technically resistance is also a factor) to the contagion that your chance of getting it is low - which also means it can’t run wild.
The specifics are highly population and infection dependent. For example: in a spread out herd the requirement may be lower. Conversely with a high reproduction number the level may be higher.
Then when you add vaccines it doesn’t get simpler. The less effective or protective a vaccine is the higher the level will be.
Influenza is a prime example. Our vaccines are fairly terrible - with an effectiveness ranking in the 25-40% range depending on the year and strain as well as the population.
On that note: studies from 2009’s pandemic that analyzed the last three decades showed significantly higher levels of herd immunity when school children were vaccinated by priority instead of when elderly were.
Part of the problem around herd immunity in the current discussion is the problem of herds. We, Americans, are not one herd. We are legion. (Hehe). A given population in America - such as geographical - may obtain herd immunity while another does not.
For me the key to understanding Fauci is that he is first and foremost a vaccine guy. Vaccines are his hammer. It is the only tool he has, so it is the only solution he can see.
Now here is where he has a problem with herd immunity: if we achieve it without vaccines, do we really need him and his hammer? Clearly there would be a case to be made that we do not (I can make that case either way though, so I may be biased there) and therein lies his fundamental issue.
Whatever he started his career as, he has been a “politician doctor” long enough that he has lost the plot. That isn’t a personal dig; it happens across all fields with experts who move into management.
That said Fauci is essentially a poster boy for one of Eisenhower’s warnings: the one about “science experts” being in politics and making decisions. It is a very rare individual who can get to that level of virtual worship and come out not wanting to preserve or expand it. Frankly I haven’t seen any indication he is one such person - indeed his lying about lying is a counterweight to such a notion.
But despite herd immunity the underlying problem is what else is missing from the discussion: the still decreasing risk of hospitalization and death from this virus.
If the death Risk is high, bang the death risk. If the death risk isn’t high but the hospitalization risk is high, bang that. If you have neither, bang the infection rate. If you don’t even have that bang “new infections” and “new strains”. It’s the equivalent of the lawyer banging the table because she has neither facts nor law.
Notice that when they talk of deaths they only talk about the total. If they deign to talk of the currents they drop the context of “compared to what?” And they never talk about the “case fatality rate”. It’s a blatant catch 22 they are stuck in. By claiming we have more and more cases but not a equivalent rise in deaths they are leaving the elephant of a lower death rate hanging.
I agree, herd immunity is a useful concept. There are different valid views on the percentage figure to make it effective. I prefer the opinions of the Great Barrington Declaration people who for the C19 virus go for the lower end of the range.
I live in kia vegas. For a long time in the beginning of the pandemic, there were like 1000 deaths out of nearly 3 million residents. I thought my chance of meeting a zombie and getting bitten here was like 1000/ 3,000,000. So my decision was to avoid situations where large numbers of zombies congregated- like nightclubs, concerts, casino shows. I didn’t like being cooped up in crowded planes, cruise ships, trains, etc- so u stayed away
But I continued on with my life. I got groceries, went to Costco at uncrowned times, and continued eating out. I didn’t think masks were if much effectiveness, so I didn’t wear one except when forced to.
I went outside and didn’t stay cooped up with strangers, but I pretty much thought the governmental mandates were useless and infringed on my rights
It’s 9 months later, and so far I have been ok and 75 years old. Now I am being offered weapons against the zombies (vaccines). I think I have survived because of what I have chosen to do, not obey the gov mandates
WHO Woefully Hamstringing Opposition is an obvious menace.
Remember the natural gas shortage a decade or two ago? Federal law banned indoor gaslighting. Now with a natural gas surplus, the government has NOT rescinded the ban. That’s all the proof I need that the intent is to oppress us. Reconfiguring definitions, in healthcare and elsewhere, is further proof.
Remember the continually revised definition of AIDS a few decades ago, so that the number of AIDS patients kept rising? Here we go again....
/troll