Herd Immunity is not a myth according to Mayo Clinic

Vaccines are the best hope for ending the pandemic, according to the Mayo clinic.


Get the facts about COVID-19 vaccines

 

However, there are some major problems with relying on community infection to create herd immunity to the virus that causes COVID-19:

• Reinfection. It’s not clear how long you are protected from getting sick again after recovering from COVID-19. Even if you have antibodies, you could get COVID-19 again.
• Health impact. Experts estimate that in the U.S., 70% of the population — more than 200 million people — would have to recover from COVID-19 to halt the pandemic. This number of infections could lead to serious complications and millions of deaths, especially among older people and those who have existing health conditions. The health care system could quickly become overwhelmed.

Herd immunity also can be reached when enough people have been vaccinated against a disease and have developed protective antibodies against future infection. Unlike the natural infection method, vaccines create immunity without causing illness or resulting complications. Using the concept of herd immunity, vaccines have successfully controlled contagious diseases such as smallpox, polio, diphtheria, rubella and many others.

Herd immunity and COVID-19 (coronavirus): What you need to know

 

From the article- this is why I say heard immunity is a myth:

But reaching herd immunity through vaccination against COVID-19 might be difficult for many reasons. For example:

• Vaccine hesitancy. Some people may object to getting a COVID-19 vaccine because of religious objections, fears about the possible risks or skepticism about the benefits. If the proportion of vaccinated people in a community is below the herd immunity threshold, a contagious disease could continue to spread.

Herd immunity and COVID-19 (coronavirus): What you need to know

Varients are coming out of unvaccinated areas. This is the issue. The hope for herd immunity has passed...or at least has been severely hampered.

Delta variant renders herd immunity from Covid ‘mythical’

 

Uh....read the post before making a fool of yourself...

I presented both natural vaccination which the article criticizes as problematic because it will cost too many lives. AND I presented the vaccine path which the article viewed as problematic because people tend to decline vaccines.



And then I presented an article saying why heard immunity will be a myth (because of varients).

Did you intentionally lie about me or did you just not read what I posted?

 

@Revmitchell -

This is where I question your integrity (one place, anyway) - Covid Shot ENHANCES Delta Infectivity

The claim is the CDC says vaccines enhance delta infectivity.

The source referenced in the OP article:

"Walensky claimed that while the vaccine works well to prevent hospitalizations, the CDC is “seeing concerning evidence of waning vaccine effectiveness over time and against the delta variant.” She cited reports of international colleagues, including Israel “suggest increased risk of severe disease amongst those vaccinated early.”

The articles presentation of what was referenced:

According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, people who got the COVID shot early are now at increased risk for severe COVID disease.
This may be a sign that antibody dependent enhancement (ADE) is occurring, or it may simply indicate that the protection offered is limited to a few months, at best.


It is a fact that the article misquoted the XDC and the conclusion provided by the article was not what was said in the reference it sourced.

BUT YOU said the OP had integrity and it was a great source (you praised misinformation and lies).

That is the problem with politics. Some Christians will forfeit their integrity in defending their opinion. They choose to "walk in darkness". In terms of character, they fall.

Why did you praise the article for lying?

 

I do not like or dislike either article.

But the most illiterate fool should be able to tell an article referencing the CDC stating the early vaccinated have an increased chance of getting sick than later vacvinated thus boosters may be needed as the CDC says the vaccinated have an increased chance of getting sick than the unvacvinated.

What the CDC said in the reference for the source is not at all what the source reported as being said.

Opinions are subjective. The issue with the article is objective. The article lied and you praised it for lying. That is wrong. Period..

 

I am a member and a moderator. I do not moderate threads where I am involved. So your smoke screen accusations are misplaced.

I am questioning your actions. I do not know if it is your integrity or discernment but you have been advocating lies because you like the opinion. That is an issue. That is a spiritual issue.

Christians should not call evil good - even if the ultimate conclusions prove correct.

 

I'm not embarrassed at all. I have posted data and articles that hold an opinion (and their opinions could be wrong).

BUT I have not affirmed lies when the truth has been made apparent.

The CDC stated that early vaccinated have increased sicknesses compared to initial vaccinated indicating a possible need for booster vaccinations.

By your praise YOU say that means the CDC said the vaccinated have increased sickness compared to the unvacvinated.

That simply is not true. The CDC did not say what you preach it said by praising the misinformation.

 

I don't mind people challenging the vaccine and pointing out risks involved. I don't mind people questioning the effectiveness of vaccines on varients.

We need those questions and challenges.

BUT people should not be deliberately misrepresenting the truth even if it supports their opinion.

Misquoting sources is never acceptable.