WHO Herd Immunity Response! ‘Immoral’



[ad_1]

Ghebreyesus held meetings with WHO experts on pandemics via videoconference at WHO headquarters in Geneva, Switzerland. Emphasizing that a new record has been broken every day in the number of cases for the last 4 days around the world, Ghebreyesus said: “Many cities and countries report an increase in occupancy rates for hospitalization and intensive care.” shared his knowledge.

Ghebreyesus noted that there has been some debate about the concept of “achieving herd immunity” by allowing the virus to spread recently, emphasizing that “herd immunity” is actually a term used for vaccination. “Herd immunity against measles, for example, requires that about 95 percent of the population be vaccinated.” Ghebreyesus noted that the remaining 5 percent will be protected by not spreading measles among those vaccinated.

Ghebreyesus, “In other words, herd immunity is achieved by protecting people from the virus, not exposing them to the virus.” He warned.

WARNING “CORONAVIRUS IS COMMITTED FOR THE SECOND TIME”

Ghebreyesus, who reacted strongly to views on implementing a “herd immunity” strategy to combat the epidemic, said: “First of all, we do not have enough information on Kovid-19 immunity. In the history of public health, herd immunity has never been used as a strategy to respond to a pandemic. It is scientifically and ethically problematic. ” He said.

Ghebreyesus stated that in many people infected with Kovid-19, an “immune response” will occur in the first few weeks, but they do not know how strong and permanent this response is.

“We have some clues, but we don’t see the whole picture. There are also some cases of people infected with Covid-19 contracting the virus a second time. So letting the virus circulate uncontrollably means allowing unnecessary infections, suffering and death.” . “forewarned.

“IMMORAL”

Emphasizing that Kovid-19 not only kills the elderly and people with chronic diseases, people of all ages die from this virus, Ghebreyesus said:

“Allowing a dangerous virus to circulate freely that we do not fully understand is simply immoral. This is not an option. But we have many options. There are many things countries can and can do to control transmission and save lives. This is for allow the virus to circulate freely. It is not a choice between giving up and shutting down our partnerships. “

[ad_2]