top of page

The Herd Vs The Individual

Updated: Jan 30, 2021

Chapter 8: Article 6

Why does the media REFUSE to report that the vaccinated population is contributing to the spread of illness? 

In the previous article I provided several examples demonstrating this. The vaccinated ARE spreading whooping cough more than the unvaccinated are, the vaccinated are spreading flu nearly as much as the unvaccinated are, and the recently vaccinated do shed virus and are capable of infecting others for up to 6 weeks after receiving a live vaccine. In light of that, it seems we need to take a very long hard look at vaccine messaging.

Media often emphasizes that these illnesses are absolutely terrifying and deadly, and because of that it is everyone’s moral responsibility and obligation do their part to prevent others from becoming sick. Media focuses on vaccination ONLY, as the ONLY measure that we must all take, to protect the herd. They say that if you aren't doing your part to protect the herd, then you're an immoral and irresponsible person. Right? So lets take a more thorough look at that.

Does the health of the herd really come first, over individual choice? This is a critical question. Either it's paramount and is priority number one, OVER EVERYTHING ELSE, or it isn’t.

IF herd health is paramount, then shouldn't we be expected to take ALL precautionary health measures, always? Restricting our protective health measures to just the convenient ones, like vaccination, that too should be considered irresponsible and immoral. No?

A healthy herd only results when each individual member has optimal personal health. Individual heath is supported by ALWAYS eating a healthy diet, by always getting enough sleep daily, by never exposing yourself to factors that can make you ill or weaken your immune system, factors like smoking, not exercising enough, having too much stress, etc. The health of the herd is obviously best protected when sick people don't expose others to the illness they have.

If the herd comes first, then shouldn’t the Government enact mandatory measures to protect the herd.

The government would need to make it illegal to sell unhealthy food, they'd need to cut the power to all residences during specified “sleeping” hours, abolish all “unhealthy” lifestyle choices (including experiences and products that can be purchased). Alcohol and tobacco are huge contributors to poor health, so those products would definitely need to be abolished. In addition to that, the government would need to mandate quarantine measures for anyone who has been exposed to any illness, for anyone who has received a live viral vaccine, for anyone who was in contact with a recently vaccinated person (live viral vaccines), for anyone who is ill with anything, and during outbreaks, etc. Anything less than those measures should be deemed immoral and irresponsible. As I said, our moral obligation cannot be limited to ONLY the convenient measures like vaccination.

But, if we were forced into living that way, many of you would be protesting and rioting in the streets, so I think it’s safe to say that as a society we don’t actually believe that the health of the herd comes first over individual choice. We all expect to be able to choose for ourselves what health measures we will take in our lives, and which ones we won’t take. Seeing that, do you not see how unacceptable it is to discriminate against others for the health choices they make, simply because you disagree with them on one health aspect - vaccination.

Why is it today, that the pro-choice/unvaccinated group is the ONLY group being called immoral, irresponsible, and dangerous? 

EVERY SINGLE HUMAN BEING on this planet, regardless of vaccination status, has made choices which have negatively affected our herd health. Recognizing that everyone is contributing, you need to start paying very close attention to media messaging, how media proclaims these illnesses are extremely terrifying, but ONLY when transmitted from the unvaccinated populations. The silence they have, regarding how the vaccinated population is also spreading illness, is telling. To label and stigmatize the unvaccinated only (Ch8: Article 5), to terminate their employment, to force only the unvaccinated out of schools, to withhold Government financial support to parents of unvaccinated children, is nothing more than a punitive measure and an act of discrimination that is being used in hopes of coercing or forcing people into a DESIRED behaviour or action.  Coercive and forceful measures, when used in medical procedures, means that VOLUNTARY, informed consent - an ethical principal required by the Nuremberg Code - is not being honoured and protected (Ch8: Article 4). Disregarding the ethical principals of the Nuremberg Code will pave the way towards a dangerous future.

Remember what Dr. Carol Baker said in 2016. She is a highly respected doctor who has received at least two prestigious medical awards recently (2018 and 2019). She stated:

..."so I have the solution. Every study published in the last five years - when you look at vaccine refusers [who are white, the most educated and wealthy Here Here Here]...we'll just get rid of all the whites in the United States."

To ignore the Nuremberg Code, or to relax or retract those ethical principals means that the atrocities of our past become a present or future possibility again. And THAT, is nothing short of dangerous. 

Medical freedom, medical choice, and medical ethics must be honoured, protected, demanded and respected, even when - ESPECIALLY WHEN - a person, group or minority is choosing differently than you would. 

CONTINUE to the next article here: Ch8: Part 7

Article Sources

  • Dr. Baker - "Get rid of all the whites in the United States" Clip & Full Video

  • Info on the Nuremberg Code Here

  • Professor Mary Holland addressing the UN on vaccination policy Here

  • Flulaval Package Insert – Clinical Trial Data is Presented on Pages 18-19 Here

  • Whooping Cough: Vaccine Fails to Prevent Infection and Transmission of Illness Here

  • Chicken Pox: Package Insert – The Vaccine Virus can Infect Others – Pg 5 Here

  • Chicken Pox: 5 months after 2 siblings were immunized against chicken pox, the one child developed shingles and subsequently infected his sibling with vaccine strain chicken pox Here

  • Shingles: Vaccine can infect others with Chicken Pox – Pg4 Here

  • Rotavirus: Shedding Here and Here, and Sibling Transmission of Vaccine Derived Rotavirus Here

  • Measles: Sheding Here and vaccinated child develops vaccine strain measles 37 days after immunization Here

  • Mumps: Vaccine strain mumps infected the vaccinees and was transmitted to family contacts Here

  • Mumps: Another case of vaccine transmission Here

  • Flumist vaccine sheds for up to four weeks Here

  • Hospital Recommendations to Visitors who have been Vaccinated Here

1,270 views0 comments

Recent Posts

See All

Fraud: Poul Thorsen & Andrew Wakefield

Chapter 8: Article 1 Let’s turn our attention back to fraud, again. Poul Thorsen is a Danish researcher, and the US Government has charged him with wire fraud and money laundering. It’s believed he st

Propaganda & Censorship: Part 1

Chapter 8: Article 2 Drug safety and effectiveness is a measurable thing that can be tested in a clinical setting. But, a drug’s use, its overuse or improper use, that sometimes results from its accep


bottom of page