Health & Wellbeing

There has been a LOT of talk in the media, various forums, twitter, etc, about "herd immunity" in regards to the corona virus pandemic.

The idea, basically, is that if enough people catch and subsequently become immune to the virus, the virus will "look around" for new hosts within the population, as some have suggested, and finding none available, recede and eventually die out.

That "looking around" suggests viruses are alive, seeking to reproduce like bacteria and fungi.

[See supplemental article Covid-19, herd immunity and common sense]

TL;DR

• The concept of "Herd immunity" fails elementary rational analysis.
• A "herd" cannot be scientifically defined. A "herd" remains an irreducibly vague concept.
• Ipso facto, "herd immunity" is not an identifiable, valid phenomena.
• Population percentage deaths and illnesses correlate with psycho-social-enviro factors.

When the subject of vaccination1 is discussed within a group (e.g. online forum), and there are some within that group who are pro-vaccination, almost invariably they will at some point raise the issue of herd immunity.

First let's clarify what is meant by "herd immunity"2
. From Wikipedia3 this:

"Herd immunity (also called herd effect, community immunity, population immunity, or social immunity) is a form of indirect protection from infectious disease that occurs when a large percentage of a population has become immune to an infection, thereby providing a measure of protection for individuals who are not immune".

There are, it seems to me, a number of aspects to this subject that need clarification:

I've previously written about the importance and power of letting go the past, relationships that are 'toxic' and behaviours that aren't aligned with, or heading us towards health, wellbeing and happiness.

No surprise then to find others extolling the same approach.

This from a Sydney Morning Herald Spectrum article in which American author Augusten Burroughs is interviewed.

From the article:

It's futile to try to understand the damage we have suffered, he says, because we only have our perspectives about what happened, and not the perpetrator's or bystander's. Not only this, such a search is irrelevant to what we need to do now to cope, which is to focus on the present and keep busy with activities such as exercise or housework so as to break the "addiction" of dwelling on the past.

...

"I know it sounds like the most ridiculous thing in the world but you need to force your brain out of that neural pathway, out of that trap, out of that chemical etching," he says.1

Well said, I say.

Overview:

All matter, energy, people and populations are both feminine-wave and masculine-particle natured. Women, by being orientated towards the community-wave nature, are more naturally group-orientated. Hence their generally more refined interpersonal skills, communications abilities and relationship-orientations.1

This also leads to the higher prevalence of women using or believing in 'astrology' and other means (e.g. numerology) for assigning people to various groups (tribes, star-signs).

Do you genuinely seek answers to the deeper questions and problems of life?

Then you'll find some different and arguably deeper, and more congruent perspectives at this site. Hopefully they'll be of value to you. The ideas provided are based on timeless truths, and are (at least in my experience) able to be applied in all areas of life. Enjoy. Stephen Pirie The Belief Doctor

By coincidence I've only recently (namely, this morning) come across a 1991 paper by Prof. Robert Jahn of Princeton's famous1 PEAR laboratory.

Jahn's paper is quite extraordinary, at least for me, for it covers many of the basic concepts that I wrote about in my book Be and Become.2

One of the central points of Jahn's paper is that not understanding the complementarity of 'masculine' and 'feminine' fuels "immensely destructive" behaviours and results, both personally and socially. From Jahn's paper:

When posed in polar opposition, whether within a single personality, or in the context of the ubiquitous interactions between the male and the female sexes, the failures of this interface are legion, legendary, and immensely destructive, both personally and socially. Yet, when deployed in constructive complementarity, the masculine/feminine integration within the individual can enable the highest creativity and personal satisfaction, and in the male/female partnership can generate some of the highest accomplishments, profoundest insights, and most beautiful resonances of human existence. In this form, it is probably the species' most powerful resource for spiritual as well as physical survival and evolution.

Why I concur with Jahn is that the deeper nature of what 'feminine' and 'masculine' actually mean is not widely understood or appreciated.

• 1. or infamous, according to skeptics and assorted naysayers. See my article on sceptics and their brethren
• 2. I used to think that I had intuited new, highly original insights into the deep frameworks of life, but Jahn has demonstrated he largely got there first! I suppose my contribution is the comprehensiveness of my work, going well beyond that of Jahn's paper. Still, I freely give recognition when it is appropriate and deserved.