Can we all just agree not to consider the “vast majority” vaccinated unless it reaches herd immunity? This is a very hopeful and optimistic article, but the news it presents is not actually all that good. The vaccination rates are sufficient to protect most people, but most is a pretty low bar when it comes to infectious disease.
91% immunized against polio is enough to keep it from spreading. But 72% is not enough for HPV. And 89% is not enough for measles, not nearly enough. The required threshold for measles might be as high as 94%. And that’s just to prevent spreading throughout the whole population, not for prevent local outbreaks. Unvaccinated people tend to associate with each other… it doesn’t help for even 99% of the population to have immunity if all the vulnerable people live in the same town or go to the same school.
There are many people who simply can’t be vaccinated, because they are too young, or too old, or they have compromised immune systems, or they are immunosuppressed. The measles fatality in Washington this year was immunosuppressed.
89% sounds like a high number when you first hear it. But that still means 11% are being negligent. It still means the deaths of infants and cancer patients. If 11% of the population were attacking transplant recipients with thrown rocks instead of viruses, would that be low enough?
No comments:
Post a Comment