The term "Herd immunity" only refers to those who live. Please stop using it?

  • Thread starter Thread starter The_Old_Maid
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Actually, blood banks want donors who caught the virus and recovered, so that their plasma can be used to heal those who’ve been hospitalized by the virus.
 
How does this thinking jive with the notion that healthy people can transmit the virus to those who are at risk? Do you not believe that those who are healthy should make any effort to protect those who are not? This is apart from the evidence that plenty of healthy people have also come down with the virus. Are we not, after all, our brothers’ keepers?
 
Last edited:
rosejmj said:
. The common good encompasses many factors including the economy, and social structure, and mental health, not just physical health. If you sacrifice all those in the name of physical health
Click to expand...
But all the CDC is asking is that people follow a few simple rules that would not shut down the economy, such as wearing masks and social distancing. But the attitude expressed in this post dismisses even those inconveniences. That is the post I was responding too when I said the attitude was immoral.
rosejmj said:
If people want to protect themselves they can choose to stay home.
Click to expand...
And here we see that same immoral attitude that makes no allowance for the Common Good. People who want to protect themselves cannot simply “stay home”. They need to buy groceries. They need to have doctor’s appointments.
rosejmj said:
It is also estimated, if herd immunity is possible, based on places like New York and Italy and Spain that the rate of infection may actually need to be much lower than the 60-70 percent to achieve herd immunity- like only 40 percent.
Click to expand...
That estimate is based on a corresponding public pattern of behavior, which New York is still using, such as wearing masks in pubic indoor gatherings. If those masks are all thrown away you are back to the 60-70% figure, and a corresponding number of deaths and long-term organ damage for those that do survive. The fraction necessary for Herd Immunity is not a simple function of the properties of the virus itself. It is affected by many things, such as population density, amount of social interaction, etc.
 
How is your notion of the common good realized when more and more people become ill due to the spread of the virus without the help of those who are not ill? You seem to have a strange notion of what the common good is. How does this help the economy when places cannot do business due to the spread of the virus? Apart from the moral concern of dividing society into the haves and the have-nots, how does the isolation (even if it were possible) of only those who are high risk help those who are not at risk in terms of business since they are losing more and more customers due to illness?
 
Last edited:
I think herd community is a simple method of getting parents to cooperate with vaccines and feel like they are doing their duty blah blah blah. Its baloney.
 
Sure, and we should take reasonable precautions while weighing the totality of the risks.
 
Good to hear. And reasonable precautions, I assume, include wearing masks, social distancing, hand-washing, and the like?
 
The_Old_Maid said:
Please know that I am not aiming at anyone, my fellow posters, but at the term “herd immunity.” It is inaccurate, repulsive, and inexpressibly cruel. But I also know that many people innocently use the term without knowing what it means.
Click to expand...
It’s by no means is inaccurate, it is a matter of numbers. The fact is, right now people who get this will either recover or they will die. If they recover it will be due to treatment or a cure. Once a vaccine is available fewer people will get it. Those that do will either recover or they will die. It is just words why do these word repulse you?
 
The problem is there are huge numbers of Americans living in multi generation families. I am one of them. My daughter and her two kids live with us…the kids half time as dad gets them the other half. My husband and I just can’t prevent every possibility but seeing everyone in masks…now mandated here…is huge for us.

I’m even in favor of them returning to school as our district is putting in every safety measure possible. They will be attending half time and online the other half. We do have the option to do online only but my granddaughter is ADD and benefits greatly with direct instruction.

I accept the risks as long as people obey the mask mandate and follow the rules. Id love to be barefoot all the time but everywhere makes me wear a shirt and shoes. I’ve never seen any great uproar over that mandate! Masks are not comfortable. They’re hot. People don’t wear them correctly. But, they help keep me and mine safer than not wearing them…and really, for another six months to a year…whatever the timeframe is…is not asking any more than me wearing shoes.

We aren’t being asked to wear full biohazard suits or big respirators…just a clean cloth or paper mask. Be kind. Be charitable. This, too, shall pass.
 
mary77 said:
I think herd community is a simple method of getting parents to cooperate with vaccines and feel like they are doing their duty blah blah blah. Its baloney.
Click to expand...
The reason it is called “herd immunity” and not something more human-centric is that it is a fact that has been understood by cattle ranchers for many many years. Cattlemen know that when you vaccinate one animal you contribute a little to the health of the entire herd, not just that one animal. The combined effect of a sufficient number of cattle being vaccinated is that the threat of the entire herd being wiped out is vastly reduced. So, yes, it is a real thing. Just ask any cattle farmer.
 
the fact is todays vaccines are short lived, they have to be regiven over and over, they caused too many vaccine injurys and have to keep altering the doses, herding cows is not at all like people
 
mary77 said:
the fact is todays vaccines are short lived, they have to be regiven over and over, they caused too many vaccine injurys and have to keep altering the doses, herding cows is not at all like people
Click to expand...
So, if herd immunity is offensive to you, just call it community immunity…plus, that rhymes! :hugs:. Herd immunity is the medical term used so, it’s just being medically correct.

Not all vaccines are short lived. The common flu ones are and each year they try to determine the most likely flus to crop up. Some years, they are spot on. Other years they aren’t. But even when they get it wrong, it still confers some immunity, just not as strong as desired. If everyone able to get the flu vaccines actually got one, our flu seasons would be a drop in the bucket to what they currently are. But, we don’t force everyone to vaccinate for the flu.

Measles, mumps and rubella are once and done. Lifetime immunity! Why anyone would refuse those is beyond me…excluding those that can’t for medical reasons. Many people don’t realize how dependent some are to community immunity. My granddaughter was a micropremie and had to wait until she was one year old before she could be immunized. She was totally dependent on community immunity to protect her until she was old enough. Some people can never get the shots so their entire life, they are dependent on community immunity. Anti vaxers could literally kill these people and some entire communities are so anti vaccine that community immunity no longer exists in their neighborhoods. There’s a disaster waiting to happen.

If you don’t understand the science behind community immunity or mask wearing or social distancing or hand washing then please just accept the advice given by your leaders and follow the guidelines. You don’t have to like it, just follow it. It’s for the good of the entire community and it’s the proper way to be a good person.
 
Last edited:
mary77 said:
the fact is todays vaccines are short lived, they have to be regiven over and over,
Click to expand...
That depends on the vaccine. The flu vaccine is short-lived in the sense that it does not protect for more than one season. But the measles vaccine confers protection for life.
they caused too many vaccine injurys
Click to expand...
So say the pseudo-scientific anti-vaxer websites. Don’t fall for their disinformation, please.
herding cows is not at all like people
Click to expand...
In the sense of herd immunity it is.
 
LeafByNiggle said:
40.png
RhodesianSon:
Not any more immoral than the same position in regards to any communicable disease.
Click to expand...
That’s true. It is also immoral to be cavalier about spreading herpes, measles, and the flu. Especially with covid-19, there is no effective way of protecting people other than isolating them. In Catholic moral theology it is referred to as the Common Good. It is immoral to ignore it.
Click to expand...
I think it’s remarkable that the main issue at hand is whether perfectly healthy people take precautions against spreading a disease they don’t have. That’s kind of the level of crazy that some of us can’t believe.
 
Anesti33 said:
40.png
LeafByNiggle:
40.png
RhodesianSon:
Not any more immoral than the same position in regards to any communicable disease.
Click to expand...
That’s true. It is also immoral to be cavalier about spreading herpes, measles, and the flu. Especially with covid-19, there is no effective way of protecting people other than isolating them. In Catholic moral theology it is referred to as the Common Good. It is immoral to ignore it.
Click to expand...
I think it’s remarkable that the main issue at hand is whether perfectly healthy people take precautions against spreading a disease they don’t have. That’s kind of the level of crazy that some of us can’t believe.
Click to expand...
If you can prove you are perfectly healthy, then sure, no reason for you to wear a mask. How many people can do that? Not even a negative covid-19 test is perfect assurance that you are not infected. And even if it is accurate, it only says you are not infected the day you take it. The test proves nothing about you a week later. So the only people that could possibly be excluded from having to take social distancing precautions are the very few who got a negative covid-19 test the same day. That is a fraction of a percent of the US population. It would be crazy to try to structure a rule that allowed for that exception. It would be impossible to administer. I that clearer?
 
LeafByNiggle said:
Not even a negative covid-19 test is perfect assurance that you are not infected. And even if it is accurate, it only says you are not infected the day you take it.
Click to expand...
I don’t recall you making such observations when Fauci said he had taken a test the day before going without a mask at a ball game.

This seems very inconsistent.
 
The height of irony must be people who are telling others to not compare Covid to the flu because of the difference in lethality, and then go on to comparing Covid to smallpox… Please get a reality check.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top