The Theory of Herd Immunity Has Nothing to Do With Vaccination

The Theory of Herd Immunity Has Nothing to Do With Vaccination

There is a better than even chance that if you ask someone at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) or the World Health Organization (WHO) or your family physician who first discovered the poliovirus and when they did it, they would have a hard time coming up with the right answer. The answer, by the way, is Karl Landsteiner, MD and Erwin Popper, MD of Austria in 1908.1 2 

At the same time, it is unlikely many at the CDC, WHO or most medical doctors would be able to tell you the name of the person who came up with the theory of “herd immunity,” which serves as the foundational basis for justifying mandatory vaccination campaigns. The name of that person is Dr. Arthur W. Hedrich, a health officer in Chicago, Illinois. He observed that, “during 1900-1930, outbreaks of measles in Boston, MA appeared to be suppressed when 68 percent of the children contracted the virus.”3

Later in the 1930s, Hedrich observed that after 55 percent of the child population in Baltimore, MD contracted measles the rest of the city’s population appeared to be immune to the disease. It was these observations that led to the formulation of the herd immunity theory.3 But note that the theory was based on unvaccinated populations that were exposed to the disease and developed natural immunity to it. The protection came from the fact that each population was exposed to the disease and a certain percentage of the people got it.

The original theory of herd immunity had nothing to do with vaccination. The first mass vaccination campaigns for polio and measles in the United States, for example, did not occur until 1954-1955 and 1963 respectively.4 5 6 That’s three decades after Hedrich constructed his theory. The underlying assumption of the theory was that a community as a whole would develop a certain degree of natural protection from an infectious disease after a portion of its members actually came down with the disease, recovered from it, and became immune to it.

In other words:

The more members of the herd (community) who were exposed to an infectious disease and developed natural immunity to it, the less of a threat that disease posed to the entire herd (community).7 

Somewhere along the line between the 1930s and 1950s the theory of herd immunity was corrupted and resurrected as:

The more members of a herd (community) who were vaccinated against an infectious disease and developed immunity to it, the less of a threat that disease posed to the entire herd (community).

Notice the clever sleight of hand there. Suddenly, the importance of exposure to an infectious disease was eliminated and replaced with vaccination, and the importance of natural immunity was diminished. That’s a problem, because both of those elements are key to Hedrich’s theory. Hedrich was not thinking about a vaccinated community or vaccine-induced—“temporary”—artificial immunity when he thought up his theory. He was thinking about the process of how a disease works its way through a community and how that community, eventually, naturally builds up a resistance to it as a result.

Dr. Hedrich would not recognize his theory today. He would likely be the first to speak up and say, “Uh, no, that’s not at all what I had in mind. You missed the central point.”

Just about anyone with the equivalent of a high school education can answer the question, “Who developed the theory of relativity.” Einstein, of course. The theory is central to the science of physics. Although some have tried to question it, no scientist or professor of physics of any note would dare try to misrepresent or redefine it.

Yet, ask any public health official or health care professional involved in giving vaccinations to correctly explain the theory of herd immunity and who developed it, many would probably fail on both counts. Why? Because they have not made an honest effort to study the history of the theory. They have erroneously accepted as truth the relatively new myth promoted by public health officials around the world that herd immunity can only be attained through a highly vaccinated population and that every unvaccinated individual threatens the health of and weakens the herd.

Hedrich’s theory of herd immunity has been twisted by the myth that vaccine acquired artificial immunity is identical to naturally acquired immunity, which is false. That myth serves to perpetuate the idea that only strict enforcement of mandatory vaccination laws will protect society from disease, which is also false.


References:

1 Cáceres M. How Scientific Was the Identification of the Poliovirus? The Vaccine Reaction Sept. 15, 2017. 
2 Cáceres M. Poliovirus and Zika: What’s Past is PrologueThe Vaccine Reaction Feb. 24, 2016.
3 Cáceres M. The Misunderstood Theory of Herd Immunity. The Vaccine Reaction June 20, 2015.
4 Cáceres M. The Salk Polio Vaccine “Tragedy”. The Vaccine Reaction Jan. 11, 2016.
5 Cáceres M. Bernice Eddy Warned of Defective Salk Polio Vaccine. The Vaccine Reaction June 23, 2016.
6 Cáceres M. The Story of Measles’ Sharp DeclineThe Vaccine Reaction Apr. 12, 2016.
7 Cáceres M. Herd Immunity Theory Has Been Repeatedly DisprovenThe Vaccine Reaction May 30, 2017.

24 Responses to "The Theory of Herd Immunity Has Nothing to Do With Vaccination"

  1. sheldon101   June 18, 2018 at 10:26 pm

    Among other sins, this is a semantic game, played poorly. The meanings of words and concepts can and does change over time.

    The current meaning of herd immunity with infectious diseases for which a vaccine exists relates to the percentage of vaccinated individuals needed to protect those who aren’t vaccinated or are vaccinated for whom the vaccine is ineffective.

    You might not like that meaning, but that is the common meaning today.

    Reply
  2. Sandra Lee Smith   June 18, 2018 at 10:51 pm

    Something that seems to be left out of Hedrich’s theory too, is the very strong probability that the parents of the kids he was observing most likely already had measles themselves as children too. Exposure and recovery confers life long immunity to that disease and Mom was passing it along in her breast milk to her suckling children; ’til they were old and well developed enough to endure their own bouts of the disease, and create their own life long immunity to it, thus the “herd immunity”. Vaccinations confer only temporary immunity and must be repeated, but at the same time are introducing immune system attackers with the vaccines, AND depriving the child’s immune system a valuable learning tool at the same time as well. Some are starting to dare to voice the belief that those early “childhood diseases” serve a purpose in helping strengthen and train our immune systems to tackle the nastier bugs life can throw at us.

    Reply
  3. Jessica   June 19, 2018 at 6:31 am

    NATURAL IMMUNITY, NATURAL IMMUNITY AND NATURAL IMMUNITY.
    These are the 2 words we must scream to everyone.
    They have removed nature and replaced it with needles.
    Synthetic, artificial toxic ingredients!!
    They believe man-“kind” has invented a system to out smart mother nature by using needles toxic ingredients.

    Reply
    • mark   June 19, 2018 at 7:17 pm

      I understand the sentiment, but screaming is the best way to get people to put their fingers in their ears. There has to be a better way. I believe someone said ‘cooler head usually prevail” or something to that effect. Let’s try to use an approach that will get people to listen.

      Reply
  4. Shawn Siegel   June 19, 2018 at 7:09 am

    The phenomenon observed by Hedrich was simply the ebb in the natural, cyclical ebb and flow of infectious illness. It protected no one.

    Nor was – is – measles a threat. If there’s a threat, it’s inherent in the immune status of the individual child; his or her ability to sustain the symptoms we call the disease, but which in reality are Nature’s rather remarkable program of recovery from infection, which often proves cathartic. Quote from a British MD, from the February 7, 1959 issue of the British Medical Journal:

    “In the majority of children the whole episode has been well and truly over in a week, from the prodromal phase to the disappearance of the rash, and many mothers have remarked ‘how much good the attack has done their children,’ as they seem so much better after the measles.”

    The only protection from illness is a healthy lifestyle, beginning with diet. The resulting, robust immune system will minimize the number of times you develop infectious illness, and assure productive, successful recovery when you do.

    Reply
  5. Julie Williams   June 19, 2018 at 7:38 am

    Very good commentary with the points well taken. One thing I often hear repeated is that measles, mumps etc.. are diseases. I’m not alone in objecting to this ‘scary’ description of minor illnesses which used to be known as passing infections. Cancer is a ‘disease’. Lyme is a disease -but definitely not a passing infection. Any illness which runs its course and then clears of its own when properly addressed and leaving the host with lifelong immunity should not be considered or called a disease. This term leaves readers or listeners with a subconscious impression that contracting these infections may leave them permanently impaired when actually quite the opposite is what occurs.
    When as a child I got the chicken pox, measles or just a cold virus – no one would have said I had a disease because it’s simply not an accurate description.

    Lastly, Einstein was an unfortunate choice of comparison to what we’re dealing with today. His relativity ‘theory’ has also never been proven. But what is known is that he was a flagrant plagiarist who stole others research and put to his name. He was promoted by that ‘community’ to advance an agenda of the times and continues to be. Behind the scenes, todays ‘scientists’ quietly acknowledge this but go along with the meme that Einstein was brilliant rather than a loon. Why? To continue the snow job that quack science is the end all be all not be questioned.

    Reply
    • Jack Heginbotham RN   June 19, 2018 at 1:32 pm

      Kudos Julie… “Quack Science”, Indeed!
      I wish more “College Educated” people in this nation had the ability to question & critically evaluate the “Science Theories” they hear rather than just embracing and religiously regurgitating them.

      Reply
  6. Jack Heginbotham RN   June 19, 2018 at 7:59 am

    I suggest the concept of “Herd Immunity” is based on ignorance. It does not take into account the fact that viral exposure/infection does not always result in disease/symptomatic infection. Had Dr Hedrich known more about viruses and understood that many of those infected with measles likely never became ill; he would never have suggested the foolish “Herd Immunity” theory. In fact, if the pre-profit minded, free thinking physicians of his time had the technology available today: They would have embraced REAL scientific methodology and focused their attention on why the immune systems of so many prevent infections from developing into disease, rather than investing all of their resources into developing patented & profitable vaccines which many of us now realize are neither safe nor effective. FYI, I have been a care focused RN for 29 years and never had a symptomatic Influenza infection and never had an Influenza vaccine.

    POLIO:
    On the CDC website there WAS detailed information about Polio that provided information about how to kill the virus (intense heat, UV lights, formaldehyde & CHLORINE) as well as the actual statistics related to symptomatic infection. That page was replaced with this one: https://www.cdc.gov/polio/about/ For those who have difficulty understanding statistics; the CDC says that the unvaccinated immune system can prevent 72% of the population exposed to the virus from developing a symptomatic Polio infection. They then report that “almost 25%” of those exposed develop minor symptoms. That means ~97% of our unvaccinated population does not need to worry about poliomyelitis developing into a crippling and potentially deadly infectious disease.

    Only 3% infected with polio developed serious symptomatic infection but it seemed like an epidemic every summer because thousands of people in every community were being infected at their public swimming pools. Polio is spread through stool. One dirty diaper or dirty bottom could contaminate thousands of gallons of water. Any swimmer who got that seemingly clean water in his mouth was susceptible to infection. The summertime polio epidemics ended in the early 1960’s when public health laws mandated that public swimming pools maintain a CHLORINE level that killed/inactivated the virus which caused polio. The Polio Vaccine never prevented symptomatic polio infections but beginning in 1963 it did infect untold millions with SV-40.

    Reply
    • Dede   June 19, 2018 at 8:24 pm

      Excellent post. Thank you. It is very difficult to know this and not speak out to the ones who are believers in the medical system. The inefficient immune responses, the un-targeted consequences, are usually not realized until one experiences these consequences themselves.

      Reply
    • Jan Asena   June 20, 2018 at 8:35 am

      Hello Jack,
      Thank you for taking the time to put this information from the frontline online – it is really appreciated and frightening.

      Reply
    • Sylvia W   June 22, 2018 at 10:16 am

      Great comment Jack.
      I was looking for information on developing immunity without the history of infection just this past week and would love to read more about it. Could you share any good sources with me?

      Thank you
      Sylvia

      Reply
    • Jay   November 18, 2018 at 8:10 pm

      Jack, whether you’ll ever see this reply I’ll post anyway, SV-40 is a pretty typical RNA virus that inhabit animals and humans all the time. Overall they are harmless and non-cytotoxic. Most whom I’ve seen make a big deal of it don’t realize the harmless genetic make up of RNA virus….which are actually long known in virology as “passenger” or “associated” or “simbiot” virus. Regardless cytotoxic (DNA) nor non-cytotoxic (RNA) virus, neither are the catalyst for anaplasia. Many who claim harm by SV-40 or refer to it usually give it the ability to cause cancer. HPV neither is guilty of causing cervical cancer. Duesberg has an article on SaneVax re: HPV, cervical cancer and Gardasil. https://sanevax.org/hpv-not-cause-cervical-cancer/

      Reply
  7. J   June 19, 2018 at 9:52 am

    They cannot answer medical or historical or any questions unrelated to giving the run-around. Answering citizens is not their job. They are only there to ensure they all get paid & benefits so they don’t have to get real jobs.
    They are corrupted-absolutely Executive Branch alphabet Agencies, twisted remnant extensions of a once-great Republic. They outnumber CONgressjacks something like 4000-to-1.
    Many of the Agencies are sub-branches of what sometimes are Constitutional branches from the Cabinet. Yet, they exceed their mission & delegation authorities, left to run amok because the “leaders” are too busy making money far beyond their salaries.
    THE AGENCIES SHOULD BE HERDED INTO GUANTANAMO, yet they’ve paid off CONgressjacks and others who might have oversight or hold them accountable. Big Pig Pharma owns YOUR “Representatives,” now; YOU are NOT “Represented.”

    Reply
  8. JT   June 19, 2018 at 10:13 am

    First let me open with the fact that I am not a fan of vaccination and have stopped getting mine. I believe the adjuvants cause more harm than good in most cases and we give far too many vaccinations to the far too young. That said i remain open minded and question all views on the topic mainly because I don’t believe we have much true science available to us on the this subject. What we do have was mainly put there by big pharma and biased. The question I have with this article is it also assumes that the “artificial” immunity provided by vaccination does not produce the same “protection” that the “natural” immunity did. The argument as presented makes a leap here which leaves it open to question and diminishes the strength h of the rebuttal. So the question of does a “vaccine induced immunity” have the same effect on a community as a “naturally induced immunity” remains open to interpretation and begs unbiased scientific finding. (That said I’m still avoiding whatever vaccinations possible until I see more proof either way).
    Thanks

    Reply
    • Jason Chebib   June 19, 2018 at 3:58 pm

      I’m not sure the article claims what you say it claims, namely, “it… assumes that the “artificial” immunity provided by vaccination does not produce the same “protection” that the “natural” immunity did.” That’s not what the article is saying. It’s saying that the concept of herd immunity was predicated on herd immunity derived from the natural progression of childhood illnesses, long before the same concept was co-opted to explain how vaccine-derived immunity apparently works. That’s all.

      Reply
    • redpill   June 19, 2018 at 7:17 pm

      So the question of does a “vaccine induced immunity” have the same effect on a community as a “naturally induced immunity”.

      No. Vaccinated children are contagious and therefore there cannot be herd immunity.

      Here is the conclusion of a study done years ago by 2 FDA researchers about vaccines:

      In 1995, Golding and Scott,2 published the need for strategies to make vaccines that would generate the “required” Th cell to the corresponding microorganism. Since that time, attempts to produce vaccines that would generate a “natural”- type response have failed. So, we are left with vaccines that generate “protective” responses as a second choice. How does this work? In vaccine-induced Th2 responses, called humoral responses, the body produces large quantities of specific antibodies that block the virus from entering cells. This response is why a vaccinated child doesn’t get a full blown infection and why the child won’t spread as many viruses into the environment. However, antibodies cannot get into cells to eliminate viruses once the viruses are in the cells or cannot kill infected cells themselves. Therefore, the body has no choice other than to internalize the virus and be chronically infected when the body is forced into a Th2 antibody response. The body is essentially constipated with viruses that it cannot expel!

      Un-vaccinated children who are exposed to measles will generate the immune response that is required to make permanent immunity as well as kick out the virus from the body. The normal, healthy body’s response to viruses is to externalize them. To suppress this natural response can be as hazardous to our health as suppressing waste elimination from the bowel or toxin release from the skin. Natural Th1 responses generate cell-mediated responses that serve to both neutralize viruses by producing antibodies and most importantly stimulate the immune cells necessary to kill any cells infected with viruses. The body works to externalize and eliminate viruses when the Th1 response is generated. So we understand now that when a Th2 response is induced, “it drives the infection deeper into the interior and causes us to harbor it chronically.” It is commonly held that the presence of antibody to viruses is a sign of a chronic on-going infection not a sign of immunity. Our bodies generally need to have Th1 cells to defend against viral,
      Gram-negative bacterial, and fungal infections, and tuberculosis, as well as to protect against cancer. Th2 response is necessary to protect against Gram-positive bacterial, parasitic infections, as well as to neutralize toxins from microorganisms and the environment. A balance of Th1/Th2 cells in the body is defined as immunostasis (or immune balance) and is required for optimum health and wellness. Vaccines promote a failure in immunostasis by making the Th2-type cells dominant.

      http://pathwaystofamilywellness.org/Informed-Choice/how-do-vaccines-work-immune-mechanisms-and-consequences.html

      Golding S., Scott DE., Vaccine Strategy: Targeting Helper T Cell Responses. Ann. NY Acad. Sci. 754:126-137, May 31, 1995

      Reply
    • Lawrence Greenberg   June 20, 2018 at 4:41 am

      “The argument as presented makes a leap here which leaves it open to question and diminishes the strength h of the rebuttal. So the question of does a “vaccine induced immunity” have the same effect on a community as a “naturally induced immunity” remains open to interpretation and begs unbiased scientific finding.”

      I would like to respond to your statement cited above. Over the last several years, there have been localized outbreaks of various diseases such as measles and mumps in different parts of the country. There are always big MSM headlines on these outbreaks and the Big Pharma supporters are quick to jump on these outbreaks to push for more vaccination. What never gets much press after the outbreak is that, invariably, upon checking the facts, it always turns out that the vast majority of those who became ill WERE VACCINATED already, which shows very clearly that not only do the vaccines not work, but the ‘herd immunity’ theory behind the vaccination policy is utter nonsense.

      Reply
  9. D. Smith   June 19, 2018 at 7:25 pm

    By the time I got done being verified as “not a robot” I totally forgot what I wanted to say. Thank you for that.

    Reply
  10. D. Smith   June 19, 2018 at 7:30 pm

    I do not believe in the “germ theory” either. It’s pure bunk.

    Reply
  11. redpill   June 19, 2018 at 8:06 pm

    Childhood illness are necessary for children to avoid more critical illness when they become adults. I have read the reason these illness occur in childhood is because a child’s immune system basically knows what to do once infected. It’s like our immune systems are primed to use the virus for the body’s benefit. When you delay the illness until the teen years or adulthood-the illness can be dire. For instance mumps which have been going around for the last few years because the vaccine is fraudulent:

    Merck accused of stonewalling in mumps vaccine antitrust lawsuit-https://www.reuters.com/article/health-vaccine/merck-accused-of-stonewalling-in-mumps-vaccine-antitrust-lawsuit-idUSL1N0YQ0W820150604

    Mumps in children is not a big thing. It’s uncomfortable for a day or two but if allowed to run it’s course the child develops life-long immunity with no problems. BUT if a child develops mumps beyond the childhood years there is the possibility of meningitis and/or damage to the testes, ovaries, auditory nerves or pancreas. Having being infected with the virus naturally it incurs a certain amount of protection from certain types of cancers in adulthood. This seems to be a phenomenon with all childhood illness that the CDC and the radical extremist medical profession have deemed dangerous and life threatening.

    Vaccination did not save the world. Improvements in public health care, sanitation, better food, clean water, improvement in hygiene, overall better quality of life is what has improved the health and well being of humanity-not vaccines.

    Reply
  12. Don Fox   June 20, 2018 at 9:38 pm

    My brother-in-law refused to get vaccinated for ’flu’ and subsequently almost died. Now he gets vaccinated every year during ’flu’ season. I, on the other hand, have been vaccinated for it every year and have never had a full blown case. I realize this is anecdotal, but it convinces me. I have never had a bad reaction to vaccination of any consequence. My definition of herd immunity is that there is a threshold number in every population which will protect most of the population, which is less than 100 %.. This accounts for the fact that many avoid infections without being vaccinated. It is, of course, unethical not to make vaccination available to anyone who wants it and many do. In Canada there is mandatory vaccination only for people in health care, as far as I know. I’m very glad it is offered free in the case of ’flu’’ vaccine for seniors such as me. There is no doubt in my mind that vaccination was a life saving invention, and no anecdotal evidence will convince me otherwise. A proper gold standard double blind study of sufficient size would of course be another matter, particularly. if the statistical significance was repeatable. Ignorance and prejudice can be fatal, and is therefore dangerous…

    Reply
    • Marcie D'Andrea   August 28, 2018 at 1:51 pm

      @Don Fox – Here’s my anecdotal account: I have never received a flu vaccine. I’m 53 and can’t remember the last time I had the flu. Same goes for my mom, who is 88. She also doesn’t remember the last time she had influenza. We do remember that it wasn’t so bad that we almost died. I’m guessing the fact that our immune systems are strong helps in our fight with illness. My mom takes two prescription drugs (one she feels is unnecessary and I agree), which is unheard of in a woman her age. Vaccination does not guarantee immunity. I will stick to not receiving any vaccines and being healthful as a result.

      Reply
  13. Alan   November 6, 2018 at 1:38 pm

    Such bunkum by non-medically trained victims of conspiracy theorists. I wish no-one ill but if you are parents and lose or have disabled a chil whom you criminally refused to hsve protected, I hop you can live with yourselves.

    Reply
    • mikre   November 19, 2018 at 8:31 pm

      And what of the parents who had a child who died or was damaged by vaccines?

      Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.