[gizmo686]

Even at 100% eradication would be very difficult. As far as I am aware, smallpox is the only disease we have successfully eradicated. If you count non-human diseases, this number climbs to 2 with rinderpest.

This is assuming that we can get the vaccine to everyone. In first world countries with developed and trusted this is mostly possible, but would still be a massive undertaking.

[otakucode]

We were VERY close with Polio... but the CIA absolutely destroyed that when they ran a fake polio vaccination scam in Pakistan to get info on Bin Laden. Now it's making a comeback and doctors get shot trying to vaccinate.

[Fomite]

We were also very close on measles, but politics and the anti-vaxx crowd have done a number on it.

[matwood]

Yeah, herd immunity is an interesting concept and one the anti-vaxx people completely hose up.

For example, a measles vaccine doesn't work on a small percentage of the population. Herd immunity says though that as long as some large percentage of the population is immune, those which the vaccine do not work will be fine. The anti-vaxx people end up pushing the percentage vaccinated below what's required for herd immunity and hose the whole population. Idiots.

[otakucode]

Just to add a tad, the number needed for herd immunity differs by disease. For polio, you only need to get around 80 - 85% of the population immune before everyone is effectively protected. For measles, on the other hand, you have to get to 95%. That's one of the reasons polio is expected to be eradicated before measles, every % point higher is harder to get, so 95 is a tough goal to reach.

[sethrin]

I was thinking that we need a stronger term than idiot, but it occurs to me that this behavior is actually criminal. It causes grievous harm to one's society, which is the criterion for criminal behavior. Therefore if social pressure is not sufficient to correct this behavior, legal means will need to be employed.

[andriesm]

What about people's individual rights? I don't want the community to tell me what to inject into my body? (Ps I am NOT anti-vax)

[sethrin]

Rights can be said to have a real existence only to the degree that society dictates, and only in a social context. Your will is not inviolate simply because you choose to frame it as a right. So the first answer to that question is that it must first be established that this is some sort of right that society has agreed to respect, and secondly you would have to take on the issue of the harm to society in order to argue whether the one or the other was more important.

Vaccinations are indeed something of an affront to one's physical person. So is collecting DNA evidence. I think that you will find upon further reflection that the physical integrity of one's body is not much affected by a vaccination, and that personal liberties do not extend to causing grievous bodily harm to others.