Herd immunity vs viral shedding: Who’s infecting whom?

ab781f3a55bb51312d208a3ea6536d1c

There’s a big difference between naturally acquired herd immunity and vaccine-acquired herd immunity

Herd immunity, or community immunity as it is also known, is one of the main arguments that “pro-vaxxers” (those advocating vaccination) advance to persuade people to take vaccines. Herd immunity, so it is claimed, provides indirect protection to the unvaccinated. How? Here’s how the reasoning goes: if enough people get vaccinated, when a contagious disease hits a community, it spreads less quickly than if the majority were not vaccinated, since they are now protected. Thus, those unvaccinated few living among the vaccinated many can now enjoy some protection because the disease is finding it harder to spread and infect new individuals. This argument has many assumptions and flaws, as we shall see.

Interestingly enough, in recent times a concept that is essentially the opposite of herd immunity – i.e. viral shedding – has been in the news. You see, people using the argument of herd immunity generally claim that the unvaccinated help speed the spread of a disease, even encompassing those who got vaccinated. In other words, the unvaccinated can infect the vaccinated. The phenomenon of viral shedding, on the other hand, is showing that those who get vaccines get the virus in their body – even if it’s weak or attenuated – and the virus then sheds, can become contagious and can start spreading. In other words, the vaccinated can infect the unvaccinated. So which is the more true concept: herd immunity or viral shedding? Who’s infecting whom?

Vaccine-Induced Herd Immunity is Full of Assumptions

To get to the bottom of this question, you need to take a close look at this notion of herd immunity. It contains the following assumptions:

  1. Vaccines really are effective in protecting you against a disease;
  2. Once you get a vaccine, you are protected for a long time, or for life, against that disease;
  3. Vaccines protect you from getting infected and transmitting the disease;
  4. Herd immunity can be acquired through vaccination just as it can be acquired naturally (i.e. when a significant number of people in a community contract and overcome a disease, and then have natural antibodies against it).

Take the first assumption of vaccine efficacy. The big flaw with the herd immunity argument is that, by its very definition, it undermines the idea that vaccines actually work. If vaccines really were effective at protecting you against a disease, why would you worry that if those around got it, you would be more at risk or more in danger? If you’re protected, you’re protected, right? If the vaccine provides you genuine immunity to a disease, as Big Pharma, the CDC and the Western medical establishment like to claim, then it logically follows that it should be of no consequence to your health if you are surrounded by 1 or 100 contagious people.

The only way around this is if you believe that vaccines are effective yet contraindicated for some people, such as infants, pregnant women or the elderly. So you vaccinate yourself but not your baby or your grandmother, and you worry for their health because there is not enough herd immunity in your community. Given Big Pharma’s propensity to ratchet up the vaccine schedule on the entire population, there are not many people exempt anymore; take a look at this chart on the right or at National Vaccine Information Center to see how the schedule has changed over the last few decades for kids. However, even if you are in this (rare) scenario, there are still problems with the idea of herd immunity.

Take the second assumption of supposed lifelong immunity. If herd immunity is really so important to protect a community, that would presuppose that the vaccinated could fight off the disease – whenever it struck. So what happens after 5 years go by after you get your shot? 10 years? 20? 30? Even if you go and get your booster shots regularly, vaccine-induced immunity still wears off after time.

Take the third assumption regarding the vaccinated being able to transmit disease. As reported by Mercola in 2013, a FDA study concluded that those vaccinated against pertussis or whopping cough could still carry and transmit the disease, even they got no symptoms. In this case you become an “asymptomatic carrier“. This finding could bust a hole wide open in the herd immunity argument. If the vaccinated can carry a disease, they are not adding to a robust and protected herd.

Lastly, take the fourth assumption of vaccine-induced immunity vs. natural immunity. Clearly, there is a world of difference between artificial vaccine-induced immunity, and naturally-acquired immunity, attained through contracting and successfully fighting off a disease. The human immune system is vastly more complex and sophisticated than we understand, and is made up of specific and non-specific parts. A vaccine does not closely resemble natural immunity in many ways, including only engendering a specific response, having a completely different point of entry, not conferring lifelong immunity, etc. Besides, immunity is far more mysterious than just a measure of antibody titers.

As Mercola writes:

“The science clearly shows that there’s a big difference between naturally acquired herd immunity and vaccine-acquired herd immunity … Vaccines are designed to trick your body’s immune system into producing an immune response that includes making protective antibodies that are needed to resist future exposure to the infectious viral or bacterial microorganism. However, your body is smarter than that. The artificial manipulation of your immune system by vaccines containing lab altered bacteria and viruses, as well as chemicals and other ingredients, simply does not exactly replicate the response that your immune system mounts when naturally encountering the infectious microorganism. This is one reason why vaccine policymakers say you need to get “booster” shots because vaccine acquired immunity is only temporary and wears off, sometimes rather quickly.”

Herd Immunity is a Pseudoscientific Myth

Dr. Russell Blaylock, an expert on the topic of excitotoxins who has spoken out against the use of MSG in food, as well as the aluminum fallout from chemtrails/geoengineering which can lead to brain damage and Alzheimer’s, writes:

“If we listen to present-day wisdom, we are all at risk of resurgent massive epidemics should the vaccination rate fall below 95%. Yet, we have all lived for at least 30 to 40 years with 50% or less of the population having vaccine protection. That is, herd immunity has not existed in this country for many decades and no resurgent epidemics have occurred. Vaccine-induced herd immunity is a lie used to frighten doctors, public-health officials, other medical personnel, and the public into accepting vaccinations.”

The Danger of Viral Shedding

Herd immunity is a smokescreen for what’s really going on. It’s an inversion of the truth. While Big Pharma and the medical establishment are pointing the finger at the unvaccinated, it is actually the vaccinated who are contributing to the spread of disease.

The real issue is viral shedding. Viral vaccines are vaccines containing live viruses, even if they are weak or attenuated strains. These live viruses shed for varying amounts of time in the body fluids of a vaccinated individual – and can be transmitted to others. You can absolutely catch the virus (or bacterium) from someone who has just been vaccinated against that disease. Not only that, but viral shedding from vaccines is leading to viral and bacterial mutations, helping to create a phenomenon of new and dangerous strains of disease which can evade treatment by becoming accustomed to whatever drugs get thrown at them.

As Dave Mihalovic writes:

“Bird flu is rampaging across the Midwestern US. So far 13 million chickens and turkeys have been culled or earmarked for destruction to stop the spread of H5N2, an offspring of Asia’s H5N1 bird flu … vaccinated poultry spread the virus without getting sick, making its spread invisible. Vaccination has moreover driven the evolution of H5N1as these viruses adapt to the vaccinated birds.”
In his article he quotes Barbara Loe-Fisher, co-founder and president of the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC):
“The live polio vaccine, the Sabin vaccine, which followed the inactivated Salk vaccine, was given orally [and] contains live attenuated polioviruses. Those polioviruses, when you take that [live] vaccine, you shed them in your body fluids – your saliva, urine, and stool. Vaccine-strain viruses like disease viruses or infections can be found also sometimes in tears and vomit. This is true for the Ebola virus as well. Whether you have the viral infection or you get the live attenuated vaccine, you shed live virus in your body fluids and you are able to transmit the virus to other people who come in contact with your body fluids [my emphasis]. I think this is a very important thing for people to understand.”

Alert: Taking Vaccines Can Genetically Modify You and Generations to Come

We are already under numerous environmental assaults, including excessive radiation andGMOs, which are threatening to mutate our DNA. An article in Mother Jones reported that toxins can actually act upon your DNA and change it, at the epigenetic level.

“Researchers from Washington State University, led by biology professor Michael Skinner,reported last month that short-term exposure of pregnant rats to several kinds of chemicals caused ovarian disease not just in their daughters but also in two subsequent generations of females.”

As Jon Rappoport suggests:

“We are talking about lasting genetic changes, from parents to children, down the line. There is every reason to believe that injecting chemical toxins (in vaccines) would have a still greater permanent effect than, say, breathing pesticides.”

Remember, in addition to containing viruses that can shed, vaccines are full of toxic adjuvants (including aborted fetal tissue) which are provably carcinogenic (like the cancer-causing monkey virus SV-40) or at the very least highly harmful. We know the “scientific evidence” has being infiltrated by industry-funded studies and that the peer-review process has been hijacked.

A vaccine’s ability to lead to viral shedding, group infection, genetic mutation of you and genetic mutation of your future offspring turns the false idea of vaccine-induced herd immunity on its head. The question was asked: who is infecting whom? The evidence would strongly suggest that it is the vaccines and the vaccinated who are causing the problem and spreading the disease.

Source: https://www.intellihub.com/herd-immunity-vs-viral-shedding-whos-infecting-whom-2/

The Vaccinated Spreading Measles: WHO, Merck, CDC Documents Confirm

20 years ago, the MMR vaccine was found to infect virtually all of its recipients with measles. The manufacturer Merck’s own product warning links MMR to a potentially fatal form of brain inflammation caused by measles. Why is this evidence not being reported?

The Vaccinated Spreading Measles

The phenomenon of measles infection spread by MMR (live measles-mumps-rubella vaccine) has been known for decades. In fact, 20 years ago, scientists working at the CDC’s National Center for Infectious Diseases, funded by the WHO and the National Vaccine Program, discovered something truly disturbing about the MMR vaccine: it leads to detectable measles infection in the vast majority of those who receive it.

Published in 1995 in the Journal of Clinical Microbiology and titled, “Detection of Measles Virus RNA in Urine Specimens from Vaccine Recipients,” researchers analyzed urine samples from newly MMR vaccinated 15-month-old children and young adults and reported their eye-opening results as following:

  • Measles virus RNA was detected in 10 of 12 children during the 2-week sampling period.
  • In some cases, measles virus RNA was detected as early as 1 day or as late as 14 days after the children were vaccinated.
  • Measles virus RNA was also detected in the urine samples from all four of the young adults between 1 and 13 days after vaccination.

The authors of this study used a relatively new technology at that time, namely, reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), which they believed could help resolve growing challenges associated with measles detection in the shifting post-mass immunization epidemiological and clinical landscape. These challenges include:

  • A changing clinical presentation towards ‘milder’ or asymptomatic measles in previously vaccinated individuals.
  • A changing epidemiological distribution of measles (a shift toward children younger than 15 months, teenagers, and young adults)
  • Increasing difficulty distinguishing measles-like symptoms (exanthema) caused by a range of other pathogens from those caused by measles virus.
  • An increase in sporadic measles outbreaks in previously vaccinated individuals.

Twenty years later, PCR testing is widely acknowledged as highly sensitive and specific, and the only efficient way to distinguish vaccine-strain and wild-type measles infection, as their clinical presentation are indistinguishable.

Did the CDC Use PCR Testing On The Disneyland Measles Cases?

The latest measles outbreak at Disney is a perfect example of where PCR testing could be used to ascertain the true origins of the outbreak. The a priori assumption that the non-vaccinated are carriers and transmitters of a disease the vaccinated are immune to has not been scientifically validated. Since vaccine strain measles has almost entirely supplanted wild-type, communally acquired measles, it is statistically unlikely that PCR tests will reveal the media’s hysterical storyline — “non-vaxxers brought back an eradicated disease!” —  to be true. Until such studies are performed and exposed, we will never know for certain.

Laura Hayes, of Age of Autism, recently addressed this key question in her insightful article “Disney, Measles, and the Fantasyland of Vaccine Perfection“:

“Has there been any laboratory confirmation of even one case of the supposed measles related to Disneyland?  If yes, was the confirmed case tested to determine whether it was wild-type measles or vaccine-strain measles?  If not, why not? These are important questions to ask. Is it measles or not? If yes, what kind, because if it’s vaccine-strain measles, then that means it is the vaccinated who are contagious and spreading measles resulting in what the media likes to label “outbreaks” to create panic (a panic more appropriately triggered by our 25 year history of epidemic autism).

It would be what one might call vaccine fallout.  People who receive live-virus vaccines, such as the MMR, can then shed that live virus, for up to many weeks and can infect others.  Other live-virus vaccines include the nasal flu vaccine, shingles vaccine, rotavirus vaccine, chicken pox vaccine, and yellow fever vaccine.”

Additional Evidence That the Vaccinated Are Not Immune, Spread Disease

The National Vaccine Information Center has published an important document relevant to this topic titled “The Emerging Risks of Live Virus & Virus Vectored Vaccines: Vaccine Strain Virus Infection, Shedding & Transmission.” Pages 34-36 in the section on “Measles, Mumps, Rubella Viruses and Live Attenuated Measles, Mumps, Rubella Viruses” discuss evidence that the MMR vaccine can lead to measles infection and transmission.

Cases highlighted include:

  • In 2010, Eurosurveillance published a report about excretion of vaccine strain measles virus in urine and pharyngeal secretions of a Croatian child with vaccine-associated rash illness.[1] A healthy 14-month old child was given MMR vaccine and eight days later developed macular rash and fever. Lab testing of throat and urine samples between two and four weeks after vaccination tested positive for vaccine strain measles virus. Authors of the report pointed out that when children experience a fever and rash after MMR vaccination, only molecular lab testing can determine whether the symptoms are due to vaccine strain measles virus infection. They stated: “According to WHO guidelines for measles and rubella elimination, routine discrimination between aetiologies of febrile rash disease is done by virus detection. However, in a patient recently MMR-vaccinated, only molecular techniques can differentiate between wild type measles or rubella infection or vaccine-associated disease. This case report demonstrates that excretion of Schwartz measles virus occurs in vaccinees.”
  • In 2012, Pediatric Child Health published a report describing a healthy 15-month old child in Canada, who developed irritability, fever, cough, conjunctivitis and rash within seven days of an MMR shot.[2] Blood, urine and throat swab tests were positive for vaccine strain measles virus infection 12 days after vaccination. Addressing the potential for measles vaccine strain virus transmission to others, the authors stated, “While the attenuated virus can be detected in clinical specimens following immunization, it is understood that administration of the MMR vaccine to immunocompetent individuals does not carry the risk of secondary transmission to susceptible hosts.
  • In 2013, Eurosurveillance published a report of vaccine strain measles occurring weeks after MMR vaccination in Canada. Authors stated, “We describe a case of measlesmumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine-associated measles illness that was positive by both PCR and IgM, five weeks after administration of the MMR vaccine.” The case involved a two-year-old child, who developed runny nose, fever, cough, macular rash and conjunctivitis after vaccination and tested positive for vaccine strain measles virus infection in throat swab and blood tests.[3] Canadian health officials authoring the report raised the question of whether there are unidentified cases of vaccine strain measles infections and the need to know more about how long measles vaccine strain shedding lasts. They concluded that the case they reported “likely represents the existence of additional, but unidentified, exceptions to the typical timeframe for measles vaccine virus shedding and illness.” They added that “further investigation is needed on the upper limit of measles vaccine virus shedding based on increased sensitivity of the RT-PCR-based detection technologies and immunological factors associated with vaccine-associated measles illness and virus shedding.”
  • In addition to this evidence for the disease-promoting nature of the measles vaccine, werecently reported on a case of a twice vaccinated adult in NYC becoming infected with measles and then spreading it to two secondary contacts, both of which were vaccinated twice and found to have presumably protective IgM antibodies.This double failure of the MMR vaccine renders highly suspicious the unsubstantiated claims that when an outbreak of measles occurs the non- or minimally vaccinated are responsible. The assumption that vaccination equals bona fide immunity has never been supported by the evidence itself. We have previously reported on a growing body of evidence that even when a vaccine is mandated, and 99% of a population receive the measles vaccines, outbreaks not only happen, but as compliance increases vaccine resistance sporadic outbreaks also increase — a clear indication of vaccine failure.

    There is also the concerning fact that according to the MMR vaccine’s manufacturerMerck’s own product insert, the MMR can cause measles inclusion body encephalitis (MIBE), a rare but potentially lethal form of brain infection with measles.  For more information you can review a case report on MIBE caused by vaccine strain measles published in the journal Clinical Infectious Diseases in 1999 titled “Measles inclusion-body encephalitis caused by the vaccine strain of measles virus.

    Global Measles Vaccine Failures Increasingly Reported

    China is not the only country dealing with outbreaks in near universally vaccinated populations. Between 2008-2011, France reported over 20,000 cases of measles, with adolescents and young adults accounting for more than half of cases.[4] Remarkably, these outbreaks began when France was experiencing some of their highest coverage rates in history. For instance, in 2008, the MMR1 coverage reached 96.6% in children 11 years of age. For a more extensive review of measles outbreaks in vaccinated populations read our article The 2013 Measles Outbreak: A Failing Vaccine, Not A Failure to Vaccinate.

    Given that clinical evidence, case reports, epidemiological studies, and even the vaccine manufacturer’s own product warnings, all show directly or indirectly that MMR can spread measles infection, how can we continue to stand by and let the media, government and medical establishment blame the non-vaccinated on these outbreaks without any concrete evidence?

    References

    [1]  Kaic B, Gjenero-Margan I, Aleraj B. Spotlight on Measles 2010: Excretion of Vaccine Strain Measles Virus in Urine and Pharyngeal Secretions of a Child with Vaccine Associated Febrile Rash Illness, Croatia, March 2010. Eurosurveillance 2010 15(35).

    [2] Nestibo L, Lee BE, Fonesca K et al. Differentiating the wild from the attenuated during a measles outbreak. Paediatr Child Health Apr. 2012; 17(4).

    [3] Murti M, Krajden M, Petric M et al. Case of Vaccine Associated Measles Five Weeks Post-Immunisation, British Columbia, Canada, October 2013. Eurosurveillance Dec. 5, 2013; 18(49).

    [4] Antona D, Lévy-Bruhl D, Baudon C, Freymuth F, Lamy M, Maine C, Floret D, Parent du Chatelet I. Measles elimination efforts and 2008-2011 outbreak, France. Emerg Infect Dis. 2013 Mar;19(3):357-64. doi: 10.3201/eid1903.121360. PubMed PMID: 23618523; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC3647670. Free full text Related citations

     

  • Source: http://www.greenmedinfo.com/blog/vaccinated-spreading-measles-who-merck-cdc-documents-confirms?page=1

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *