December 12, 2013 by Dr. Sana Keller
Explanation #1: From www.vaccines.gov: When a critical portion of a community is immunized against a contagious disease, most members of the community are protected against that disease because there is little opportunity for an outbreak. Even those who are not eligible for certain vaccines—such as infants, pregnant women, or immunocompromised individuals—get some protection because the spread of contagious disease is contained. This is known as “community immunity.” Basically, herd immunity by this definition is based on the idea that 95% of a population must be vaccinated to prevent an epidemic of a specific disease.
Explanation #2: The herd immunity theory was originally coined in 1933 by a researcher AW Hedrich, which he defined as a natural phenomenon. He had been studying measles patterns in the US between 1900-1931, years before any vaccine was ever invented for measles. He noted that epidemics of the illness only occurred when less than 68% of children had developed a natural immunity to it. This was based upon the principle that children build their own immunity after suffering with or being exposed to the disease. So the herd immunity theory was, in fact, about natural disease processes and has nothing to do with vaccination. If 68% of the population were allowed to build their own natural defenses, there would be no raging epidemic. Years later, vaccine proponents adopted the herd immunity phrase (some have actually rebranded it to ‘community immunity’ to remove the reference to livestock) and increased the figure from 68% to 95% (with no scientific justification as to why) and then stated that there had to be 95% vaccine coverage to achieve immunity. They basically manipulated Hedrich’s study to promote their vaccination programs. (AW Hedrich, American Journal of Epidemiology, May 1933. Oxford University Press).
It is clear that the concept of herd immunity has been stretched into a larger definition beyond what it really means. It was never intended to be applied to the vaccination scenario. Why the difference in interpretations?? Which definition stands to benefit the pharmaceutical companies making the vaccines?? Hopefully the information provided above answers those questions. If not, the realization that the vaccine industry is a huge moneymaker for pharmaceuticals should help.
The reason I am addressing this ‘issue’ is just that…it has become an issue of many conversations (some of them quite heated) and will most likely continue to do so. I urge you to learn what you can so that you can make decisions affecting your health and the health of your family based on scientific facts instead of propaganda and media hype—or, worse , unwarranted pressure from health care providers.
- Take action now instead of waiting until you get coughed on, sneezed on, or hear that ‘the flu is going around’
- Maintain your Vitamin D levels in the optimal range annually (checked with a simple blood test).
- Get a good night’s sleep on a nightly basis–No skimping!
- Exercise (aerobic) at least 5 times/week (shoot for 30 minutes).
- Focus on making the majority of what you eat fresh vegetables and fruit, minimizing processed foods. Include garlic in your diet on a daily basis.
- Stay hydrated with filtered water (at least ½ your body weight in ounces).
- Wash your hands often with soap and water. Avoid touching your face, mouth, nose, eyes which can transfer germs.
- Keep positive self-talk running in your head: “I’m being proactive and keeping myself healthy” as opposed to “Wow, sounds like everyone is getting the flu… I’ll probably get it next.”
Wishing you health and joy… Sana Keller, MS, RN, CNC, MH, HHP www.healthunlimited.biz
Photo credits: cheeseslave.com, niaid.nih.gov, hc-blackmilk.xf.cz, hosuronline.com, premierphysicalmedicine.com