Scientists: ‘Herd Immunity’ totally fake, likely a population ‘elimination’ plan

9
1415
An electron microscope image shows the Sars-Cov-2 virus. A letter published in the Lancet by 80 signatories from the international science community says there is no evidence that immunity after recovering from Covid-19 lasts. Photograph: AP

(real) Prominent scientists sign open letter saying strategy is ‘unsupported by evidence’

The concept of ending the Covid pandemic through herd immunity is “a dangerous fallacy unsupported by scientific evidence”, say 80 researchers in a warning letter published by a leading medical journal.

The international signatories of the open letter in the Lancet say the interest in herd immunity comes from “widespread demoralisation and diminishing trust” as a result of restrictions being reimposed in many countries because of surging infections in a second wave.

The suggestion that the way out is by protecting the vulnerable and allowing the virus to transmit among those less at risk is flawed, they say. “Uncontrolled transmission in younger people risks significant morbidity and mortality across the whole population. In addition to the human cost, this would impact the workforce as a whole and overwhelm the ability of healthcare systems to provide acute and routine care.”

The signatories have expertise spanning public health, epidemiology, medicine, paediatrics, sociology, virology, infectious disease, health systems, psychology, psychiatry, health policy, and mathematical modelling. They include a number of scientists who sit on the breakaway Independent Sage group in the UK, such as former chief scientist Sir David King, former WHO director Anthony Costello, virologist Prof Deenan Pillay, behavioural scientist Prof Susan Michie and professor of European public health Martin McKee.  read more

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/oct/14/ending-covid-19-via-herd-immunity-is-a-dangerous-fallacy


The head of the World Health Organization has warned against deliberately allowing coronavirus to spread in the hope of achieving so-called herd immunity, saying the idea is unethical.

“Herd immunity is a concept used for vaccination, in which a population can be protected from a certain virus if a threshold of vaccination is reached,” Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said during a virtual press briefing.

For measles, for instance, it is estimated that if 95% of the population is vaccinated, the remaining 5% will also be protected from the spread of the virus. For polio the threshold is estimated at 80%.  read more

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/oct/14/ending-covid-19-via-herd-immunity-is-a-dangerous-fallacy

About VT Editors
VT Editors is a General Posting account managed by Jim W. Dean and Gordon Duff. All content herein is owned and copyrighted by Jim W. Dean and Gordon Duff
ATTENTION READERS
Due to the nature of independent content, VT cannot guarantee content validity.
We ask you to Read Our Content Policy so a clear comprehension of VT's independent non-censored media is understood and given its proper place in the world of news, opinion and media.

All content is owned by author exclusively. Expressed opinions are NOT necessarily the views of VT, other authors, affiliates, advertisers, sponsors, partners or technicians. Some content may be satirical in nature. All images within are full responsibility of author and NOT VT.

About VT - Read Full Policy Notice - Comment Policy

9 COMMENTS

  1. The world at large seems to be taking a blue pill / head in the sand attitude to tracking down the perpetrators (and their ultimate bosses) and making a stern example of them. Herd behavior indeed, standing around dumbly, ineffectually, watching predators pick off victims at will…
    i remember when (1960’s) there was the first serious effort towards a “cure” for the common cold; it was discovered that a whole complex of viruses were rersponsible for cold symptoms and a vaccine was impossible. Because of their typical appearance under the electron microscope they were dubbed corona viruses.
    As there appears to be a whole range of symptoms from none to cold-like to death; eventually natural selection will give a population which can survive infection by variants of this virus without crippling disabilities…
    Bioweapons are insane, any way you look at it.

  2. Once again, VT is republishing an MSM piece that’s long on emotional ad hominems and short on detailed analysis supporting the argument. Worse, this article includes a false/misleading tweet “Herd immunity is a concept used for vaccination…” (i.e. it can’t apply to immunity through contacting a disease!) In fact, a NY Times article last month cited a consensus of mainstream scientists that populations can reach herd immunity when a fairly low percentage of the population has contacted the disease and become naturally immune, whereas it would require a much higher percentage of the population to be vaccinated to get the same result. Among the reasons for this are (1) getting the actual infection stimulates the immune system against that virus more than any vaccine can, and (2) unlike vaccination, which doesn’t target people based on how likely they are to spread the virus, the virus itself naturally targets people according to how likely they are to spread it—immunizing the super-spreaders, first, then the semi-super-spreaders, then the pretty good spreaders, etc., while mostly leaving out the people least likely to spread it. Do the math, they say, and you might need to vaccinate 90% of the population to get the same level of herd immunity you’d get from 20% (those most likely to contact/spread it) actually contacting the disease.

    • Thumbs up on your post here. Yes, VT is propagating Rachel’s narrative and they, I notice after many times visiting this site, they publish Trump bashing articles – not balanced on bashing both sides which are criminal.

    • Kevin is utterly incorrect and is being agreed with by a Zionist troll….as usual. Barrett is anti-vaxx and historically tied to anti-science as a part of his islamic beliefs.

      He has no background in medicine or science.

      His analysis of the story is totally incorrect and the publications he is disagreeing with are the Lancet and and the ID Society, which means “infections disease society of America’

      hardly msm

      bad form kevin

  3. If a coronavirus that was engineered in biodeath labs to be contagious for 14 days with no symptoms, (the time release feature which made it super contagious)

    When symptoms DO appear it is disquised as the common flu to fool the doctors and hospitals,
    but is in fact SARS which kills by hyper inflammation of the lungs….(also kills through heart attacks strokes brain and kidney infections wherever ACE2 receptors exist)

    Because lab engineered, it is very unstable, and there will not be small snippets of mutations over a “season” as it is with naturally occurring mutations to viruses,

    but there will be large mutations that happen within WEEKS, not per season as the virus jumps through thousands of victims in the planned-for exponential increase of infections unless something is not done to abate the spread.

    Not to mention first virus made especially to infect Chinese genomes, create quarantine, ruin economy, the 2nd virus released into Iran in February, made to infect the Persian/Arab genomes and kill as many as possible… but ufortunate for world the rapid mutations made viruses morph into “rogue” bioagents….

  4. What kind of bioweapon would COVID-19 be if one could develop herd immunity to it? It was designed to kill as many old people, the infirm, and those to stupid to live who are running around without masks passing it onto everyone they can. Most collectivist countries have beat this thing, but not the USA…

    • So, true. And also ask them about the smallpox-infested blankets they were given back in the 19th Century. Guess they were just trying to develop “herd immunity” among the Plains Indians?

  5. Herd immunity was pushed by scientists and politicians in the Uk from the get go. They fed this into trumps brain. Why do we trust the UK so much ?

    We were founded on the principle completely at odds with Monarchy. “” The man who pretty much defined the modern role of the Queen, the Victorian Walter Bagehot, wrote of the monarchy: “Its mystery is its life. We must not let in daylight upon magic.”