Consider how many vaccines require "boosters" because they don't work very well or for very long.
It's indeed a problem that many adults don't care about their boosters.
But many vaccinations do still work for some people even if you haven't got the booster. Its quite individual how long something works.
If you can point me in the direction of one
Unfortunately I don't have one in sight now, but I will look into more detail later.
Medical interventions against the will of those having it forced upon them...
is of course wrong and a crime in my eyes, just like Istated in my text ;)
Thank you for responding. The focus should not be on adults not "caring" to get boosters but on the efficacy of the vaccines in question and how that relates to the idea of herd immunity. Adult cover is almost certainly below the stated targets of coverage for most vaccines. Herd immunity is a logically flawed concept. It is highly effective propaganda that does not stand up to even the most casual scrutiny. The "science" around vaccination does not exist......the majority of the vaccine industry today is a fraud that has killed and maimed millions for the sake of power and profit. It's just about the saddest and most grotesque betrayal of our children I am aware of or can imagine.....up there with exposing them to war.
I disagree. Since both factors might be a problem, both should be focused on. No need to only go in one direction.
Do you have statistics here?
You are not able to find sience about vaccines? Go to pubmed.com and type in vaccines - You might find some ;)
I can't even express how disrespectful this is to all children who have died from preventable diseases and their parents.
We live ( I assume you too) in western countries, where, mainly due to high hygenic standards and modern medicine, the death rate for kids is way lower than in Africa f.e.. And other than appreciating it, you tell us what a crime we are doing against our kids. Meanwhile kids in Africa die from preventable disease.
This is just pathetic.
Honestly, do you have even the first clue about how this world actually works? Can you explain to me why Africa doesn't have the hygiene and nutrition that would far better protect their people from disease than all the toxic vaccines in the world? I'll tell you, it's because their continent has been raped by imperialism and colonialism for decades.
Your obtuse disregard for all those African children who have been killed and maimed by vaccine is sadly to be expected from someone still living in the matrix.
The idea of preventing disease is of course a good one. But endless vaccine experiments run by conflicted, untrustworthy, unaccountable, profit seeking monopolies on populations of fearful, ignorant, damaged and often non-compliant populations is obviously not the best way to fight disease. It's the way they do it because it suits them.
Sometimes vaccines may, in some people, reduce the incidence of a particular disease, but cause so much other damage to the individual that they are more likely to die from something else. Sometimes the vaccine injuries are worse than the disease the vaccine was supposed to protect the individual from.
Out of your "saved" African kids. How many develop horrendous side effects from the vaccines given to them? How many develop hidden issues that made them more susceptible to cancer or other infections?
I don't believe it is pathetic to acknowledge the truth of a situation, to acknowledge that a million different things could be done better if the true goal is to help people. I don't think it's pathetic to have a desire to try to do something about it, to try to save all the children from disease, including all those killed or harmed by vaccines.
Can't argue with this. But I also don't want to. The sad fact you stated here doesn't have anything to do with the fact that vaccines are most often able to protect us from various diseases.
Sometimes seatbelts kill people who would otherwise not have died during that accident. Do you think seatbelts are useless?
True, there are many many things which can be done better around the whole world.
And yes, better science about vaccines and stricter rules on how to test them should be included as well.
But just saying ,vaccines are bad and in general do more harm than good, is pathetic.
But I am glad that we at least have something in common:
I am totally with you that there is a lot of improvement in these areas and that nobody should be forced to be a testperson for anything.
Good hygiene and nutrition are the primary bulwark against any disease. The sad truth is that Africa has large populations in abject poverty, and that have access to neither.
I would far prefer to be availed of proper hygiene and good food and unvaccinated than the reverse, and not only because I'd be more comfortable, but for the vastly improved ability to respond to disease and heal.
Good hygenie and nutrition are of course important and I would prefer them over just having vaccines as well.
However it is not just hygenie which is accountable for the drop in case reports for many disease. Look up my latest post for more detail here.
Your seatbelt analogy is flawed. Car manufacturers are held to account for safety failures far more rigorously than pharmaceutical companies (who in fact have ZERO accountability.)
Big pharma has virtually no imperative to improve the safety and efficacy of vaccines.....in fact without push back from their victims.....they are incentivised to produce as many bad vaccines as possible.
Then they can sell vaccines with cheaper ingredients and cheaper manufacturing costs, "boosters" (multiple hits of the same failed vaccine) and other drugs that deal with the laundry list of side-effects. Why not make a cancer patient out of an individual's fear of hep C? Great.
You are an aspiring doctor and I would like to believe we are in the same page. We both want to help people. Thank you sincerely for the discussion, I hope we have others. All the best.
Why is my analogy flawed? It is not always about accountability.
In situations with bad luck, a proper designed and well used seatbelt can kill - That's a fact.
I will still use a seatbelt all the time since I am convinced it will much rather save than kill me.
I know that there are many black sheep in the pharma industry - just like there are whereever money is in play.
However you don't really thing that all scientist just do their work for money? Do you think all people working in those areas just care for money?
We can agree on the fact that we should get rid of the people who are there just for the money. But it's unfair to say that all people working there are just doing it for the money. And luckily, that's not the case!
Incidentally, the title of your post contains "why you should believe in herd immunity." Can you please at least acknowledge that you have absolutely no evidence that herd immunity could reasonably work. Could you please acknowledge that, as i've pointed out, the likelihood that any populations anywhere in the world have ever reached anywhere near the vaccine coverage range that is said to achieve herd immunity is logically extremely low. You might retract your statement at least until such time as you have evidence to support the claim, especially when calling out @chron so articulately :)
I will reply in more detail since I am in a train now and don't have much time...
True, it contains the word believe. Believe, not prove. Otherwise it would be "The facts why herd immunity works!"
This post was never made to prove anything.
It was mainly made to show @chron and the many users who agreed with him, that their argument of "tourism makes herd immunity not working" was based on a big logical error and I wanted to correct that.
You were absolutely right to point out the logical flaws in @chron's post. But your arguments for why people should believe in herd immunity were also flawed. That's why I question the title....because you are asking people to believe in herd immunity, which sadly and provably, does not exist.
Actually, @theaustrianguy was incorrect, and @chron was correct.
Every one of the tourists is an unknown regarding vaccination, and therefore needs to be counted as unvaccinated for the purpose of calculating herd immunity.
Every one of them could have dropped off a disease upon their visit, so they were all potential vectors, that decreased the immunity of the herd in direct proportion to their numbers.
However, they aren't members of the herd at all, they don't stay. Their number cannot be added to the herd.
Their impact compromises the immunity of the herd, but their transitory nature means they cannot be considered a part of the herd.
@chron was correct from the get go, and the good doctor wrong.
Answered to those things above.
I would like to add a question to this. I was fully vaccinated, and I was living in Germany at the time. Only recently I found my old vaccination card and discovered to my surprise that I was even vaccinated for chicken pox (something they didn't start elsewhere till much later). Now, I never had the chicken pox. But my sister did (even fully vaccinated) as well as mumps. I however, got measles, even if I was fully vaccinated. Now, most would argue that both me and my sister would have had those illnesses to a lesser extend because of the vaccinations. BUT, in our cases, would we not be able to infect others (for instance young babies etc.) who aren't vaccinated (yet) and does this not blow the theory of herd immunity out of the water completely?
Individual cases (almost) never blow a theory.
And yes, vaccines don't work in 100% of the times. But herd immunisation doesnt require 100% as we have learned before.
As you might have seen I am fully answering to all of your questions as good as I can. However I wasn't there and therefore I can't say too much about you and your sister.
Of course, the example I gave you are individual cases and I understand what you are saying. However, if these kind of incidents happen twice in one family, I believe it is quite easy to assume that our cases are NOT singular cases since the same family had three of the diseases we were supposed to be immune against (or at least vaccinated for). I believe we can assume that this happens more than we think...
Did you get the required boosters or did you ever check a titer level?
But of course it also could be that, for a genetic reason maybe, vaccinations worke worse for members of your family.
I believe this depends on what numbers we are thinking about ;)
Yeah, I had all the boosters. My parents always did everything they were told to do, even if it killed them (not the vaccine, but it was a doctors advice or negligence, whichever comes first that killed my mother). And the numbers, well I don't know. Our family had three children. Two out of three, probably 3 out of 3 (my brother got mumps too) with one child having two illnesses she was vaccinated against...What do you think? Our family was definitely not alone, I know lots of people who still got childhood illnesses even if they were vaccinated. So even though I can't come with an exact number, I think the number is much higher than we think. Especially seen the fact that a lot of people either don't remember having the illness as a child or (like me) don't know till later that they had vaccines for those illnesses.
Something you might consider, unrelated to the vaccine safety issue, is that your family might be genetically more susceptible to those diseases, so even with vaccination, your immune systems weren't able to prevent infection.
It's possible that the additional immunity theoretically provided by vaccination saved your lives, by proactively preparing your less effective immune systems against the diseases.
The only answer for having the diseases after being vaccinated for them ISN'T that the vaccines were ineffective.
As @theaustrianguy points out, different people have different genetics, and our immune systems are different as a result.
This is also something, returning to vaccine safety, that makes giving everybody the same vaccine risky. Some people will be harmed by things that others, even everybody else, isn't.
Before very recently, it would have been impossible to differentiate between people whose genetics and immune systems require different medical treatment.
Thankfully, personalized medicine is being developed, and soon, perhaps these risks will be a thing of the past.
Setting big hopes in this aspect as well!
@valued-customer: I have two explanations for the reasons why my siblings and I did get sick. First of all: my mother didn't breastfeed either of us. She grew up in a very Catholic part of the Netherlands and I think with my brother (who's sixteen years older than me) they would have told her that it was not done to breastfeed. When my sister was born, my mother was a single parent with no support, so she had to leave my sister in care with nuns. When I was born, the midwife somehow told her some crap about how I didn't want her milk because I kept spitting (turns out: her supply was too much for my greedy little self) and talked her into giving up. So that may be a very important factor in the story. I do have to say that neither one of us is ever really sick besides a little flu or cold every few years. My sister and brother would have kept up with their vaccines, I have never had anything after I left the home at 19. I don't really believe us getting sick had much to do with our immune system, because the whole story about genetics that's been given by the medical profession is questionably as well, but of course, it's always a possibility. I am not a medical professional (not in the traditional sense anyway) but I did study pathology and anatomy during my study as a hypnotherapist. Besides this, I've been studying about different areas in the field as well during my research missions. So even though I really don't know everything, I did learn that this subject is definitely not as black and white as both sides think it is. Thank you for your input @valued-customer, you just gave me something new to work on and think about. Your input is always valuable 😎
I am sorry for your loss :(
As I said, maybe their is something genetic that makes your families members not reacting well to vaccines.
That of course is bad luck - and I understand why you might think that vaccines are not so good if you experienced that bad luck.
But in the game of big numbers, you are just a very very little part. I don't say not important - every human life is. .
There is a study done in the Netherlands for mumps. There was a big mumps breakout among students aged 20/25 a couple of years ago.
Strange thing is the students that got their mumps vaccinations as a child were more likely to get sick.
No one died by the way. Because people don't die of mumps.