Why Did WHO Change Definition Of Herd Immunity Last Year ?

John Carpay, President  of the Center of Constitutional Freedoms brought to my attention through one of his videos , podcasts this startling fact. 

On the WHO website for June 9 , 2020 the following definition is given for herd immunity :

‘ Herd immunity is the indirect protection from an infectious disease that happens when a population is immune either through vaccination or immunity developed through previous infection ‘

On November 13, 2020 the definition was changed to:

‘Herd immunity also known as ‘population immunity’ is a concept used for vaccination in which a population can be protected from a certain virus if a threshold of vaccination is reached.’

The Mayo Clinic says that that there are two paths to immunity for COVID , vaccines and infection. 

Now , there is a the persuasive idea that vaccines are necessary to get to herd immunity quicker than just through infection but Mayo does tell the truth that there are two ways to reach herd immunity .

If one looks up John Hopkins  Medical School and type in herd immunity they immediately have an article attacking natural immunity and supporting vaccine immunity. But it mentions both. It was written last August. It says Sweden who did not get into severe lockdown paid a big price in deaths comparing it to Finland and Norway. However, this world leading Institution has not updated this article to show that since last August many European countries that had severe lockdowns incurred death rates higher than Sweden —worldometer says Swedish death rate was 1359 per one million —-France is 1541, UK 1867 , Italy 1941. 

What WHO should have done was kept  the definition for honesty sake ( rather important one would think) and proceed as Mayo did and explain both methods fully.

But in their zeal to be a vaccine partisan they sacrificed honesty. 

The other points that are important and not discussed even by Mayo or Hopkins are

1. The vaccines presently available are experimental —special exemptions by Governments 
2. Hence , we know not what are possible negative effects to these

vaccines , even six months out let alone a year or two.

3. Up until now vaccines took two to four years to be approved 

4. Given that the companies are provided their own legal immunity from any negative effects of the vaccines , talking about immunity, one has to wonder just how effective these vaccines are going forward. There is even talk now that they are effective for only one year and boosters will be needed. 

5. And perhaps the biggest fault of all of all these BIG INSTITUTIONS AND MEDICAL EXPERTS was and is to downplay preventive measures which would have lessened the the number of sick people from using vitamin D, to invermectin to hdroxchoroquin and many other treatments.

Morale of the story :

A. It is hard to find the unvarnished truth . 

B .One has to dig hard and deep . 

C. Even leading reputable heath institutions are not above bias 

D. And the WHO ? Rotten as ever.