Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by joophro 1776 days ago
Herd immunity can be achieved with natural immunity + inoculation + therapeutic/chemo prophylaxis. The only time in history where natural immunity has been considered insufficient for the goal of herd immunity is 2020+. WHO went as far as changing their definition of herd immunity last year to exclude natural immunity (check the way back machine).

Leaky vaccines can also cause mutation pressure on viruses, but the only acceptable public position is that the unvaccinated are causing the more virulent strains.

Propaganda from the top down to sell more (in patent) pharmaceutical products, with force and public shame. Think about this for a moment: someone at WHO identified their herd immunity definition on their website and willingly modified it to exclude natural immunity. Ask yourself how that is in any way scientific or appropriate. It is scientific gaslighting and the only explanation is a desire to sell more vaccines.

1 comments

If we took your suggestion and let everyone get natural immunity, in the US alone this would cause 2.5 million deaths (not considering new mutations). This is unacceptable to any sane person, and does not require a massive global conspiracy propaganda campaign to convince people of.

https://www.king5.com/article/news/health/coronavirus/verify...

You realize you are posting an article from September 2020 that claims that COVID has a death rate north of 3%, which we now know to be wildly untrue, right?

Christ almighty, the vaccines-are-the-only-solution crowd is statistically illiterate and lazy. Just embarrassing.

Not only are you numbers unsound, but your position is only true if you accept the false dichotomy of “vaccines or nothing”. Prophylaxis options are available, but they’re out of patent, so they’re ignored and torpedoed by your holy CDC and WHO high priests who live in the pockets of big pharma.

>your holy CDC and WHO high priests who live in the pockets of big pharma.

Even you are wrong. Because they are not in the pockets, but they are the big pharma. They are the marketing arms of big pharma that are just a much more convincing version of the person in a lab coat in a toothpaste commercial. They just appear to do enough good stuff to not blow their cover, just like an undercover cop might go along with the baddies just enough to not blow their cover.

So if you think CDC/WHO can be "fixed" by changing the funding, you would be very wrong.