87 thousand doctors & nurses denounce both Covidiocy and the vaccine

submitted by [deleted] from gvid.tv

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]madcow-5 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

Agreed. The word was a little twisted at times before, but COVID19 killed it entirely. It's used a lot now to mean whatever a perceived authority said. Anyone wearing a suit or a lab coat.

What was the redefining of herd immunity though?

[–]StrategicTactic 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

The normal understanding is that people develop antibodies to viruses usually by fighting them off- either through a weakened form of them via vaccination or just by acquiring and fighting through the virus normally. Herd immunity pre-Covid was understood to mean when enough of a population had these antibodies to effectively prevent the virus from being able to spread.

The recent change on the WHO site was to remove the thought that people could get antibodies on their own, and any herd immunity must be acquired via vaccination.

[–]madcow-5 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Creepy. I think most people as of now still understand it as the original meaning, but I'm sure it wont take long for the left to memory hole that, like they seem to be doing with literally everything else in society.

[–]StillLessons 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

You explained much more efficiently than I did.

[–]StillLessons 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Herd immunity for a century has been understood to be achieved through two methods: first some portion of the population is infected with the agent (perhaps geting sick, perhaps not) from which the immune system learns how to fight it (among the survivors), and the next time people are exposed to the same pathogen, people's immune systems kill the pathogen before it can reproduce. The second path (which was widely recognized as inferior, it is important to note) was to vaccinate, which is to introduce a substance similar enough to the original pathogen to awaken people's immune system so that if they later came in contact with the real pathogen, the body would be "trained" to fight it already. So two paths to herd immunity: natural infection and spread through the community, leading to a group of immune people having had it, or vaccination providing a group of people whose bodies should recognize the pathogen if they encountered it.

The WHO - in its infinite politicization - decided within the past couple of months to eliminate the natural method of developing herd immunity. In other words, the only way (per our policy overlords) for herd immunity to develop is through vaccination. According to them, the people who get the bug, survive, and provide a population of bodies that now recognize the actual pathogen, don't count. Not useful. If you're not vaccinated, you are not "immune", as they now use the term.

This is the single greatest piece of stupidity I could ever imagine, because it flies in the face our understanding of thousands of years of human evolution. Natural immunity is precisely why we are resistant to the literally thousands of potential "pathogens" that surround us in the biome. We are exposed to uncounted microorganisms daily, and we don't get sick because we naturally evolved to live alongside them.

But Gates and the WHO don't want that. They want CONTROL.

If this change in thinking is successful, it will be responsible for millions of deaths, as our understanding regresses hundreds of years.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

"What was the redefining of herd immunity though?"

A means to an end. In commie thought, any means to achieving the desired socialist end is always justified.