Summary
“The societal benefit attributed to vaccines is primarily based on the concept of herd immunity, that is, the assumption that, in addition to themselves, the vaccinated also protect the unvaccinated.
A herd immunity effect is achieved when a high proportion of individuals in a population are protected against infection by a particular disease pathogen.
Vaccines can potentially provide herd protection, but in order to do so they must provide protection not only from the disease, but also from being infected by the pathogen and transmitting it to others.
Health authorities and other stakeholders are promoting the false impression that all vaccines, by virtue of being vaccines, provide herd immunity.
The reality, however, is quite different: Of the 14 vaccines on the US childhood routine schedule, only 5 clear the herd immunity bar by targeting diseases for which herd immunity is relevant for children and being capable of actually delivering it.
For the other 9 vaccines, either the vaccine does not generate herd immunity, or the protection it provides for infants and children is partial or irrelevant.
The herd immunity myth, with its implicit assumption that all vaccines offer social benefit, perfectly suits the agenda of vaccine marketers: It glorifies the supposed benefit of vaccines and nurtures a public discourse that exerts social pressure on parents to vaccinate their children.
If a child’s vaccination is assumed to contribute to the protection of those around them, then refusing vaccination would appear to endanger that child as well as their classmates, family, and friends. Thus, unvaccinated children are presented as “hitchhikers” who benefit from the herd protection provided to them courtesy of vaccinated children.
This harsh accusation is often directed at parents who choose not to vaccinate their children and puts pressure on them to align with formal vaccination guidelines.
In addition, the myth of herd immunity provides health authorities the legitimacy and justification they need to impose vaccine mandates.
The assumption underlying forced vaccination is that the social benefits conferred by vaccines outweigh people’s right to decide whether to inject government-recommended substances into their bodies.
Violation of such a fundamental human right as sovereignty over one’s own physical body requires particularly strong evidence of the benefit inherent in such a measure.
In the present case, solid evidence must be provided that the benefits of vaccines, both individually and cumulatively, substantially outweigh their harm.
Unfortunately, a true cost-benefit analysis for vaccines cannot be performed at present because the cost side is unknown.
The full magnitude of vaccination’s side effects (both short and long term), as well as the personal and societal costs involved, cannot be determined from the available science and data, as the first part of the book demonstrates.
Presently, in the absence of solid evidence for a positive net benefit for individual vaccines, as well as the totality of childhood vaccination programs, there is no moral justification for mandating vaccination, or enforcing it in any other way. Imposing medical interventions on the public–in the absence of robust and conclusive proof of their benefit–is patently unacceptable in a democratic society.”
— Turtles All The Way Down: Vaccine Science and Myth by Anonymous
https://a.co/hikrQQ0
Published by Children’s Health Defence
1200 references
Available for $10.49 on Kindle.
Sent from my iPad
Click this link for the original source of this article.
Author: brianpeckford
This content is courtesy of, and owned and copyrighted by, https://peckford42.wordpress.com and its author. This content is made available by use of the public RSS feed offered by the host site and is used for educational purposes only. If you are the author or represent the host site and would like this content removed now and in the future, please contact USSANews.com using the email address in the Contact page found in the website menu.