Just a little bee in my bonnet. I may be wrong but my understanding was
that herd immunity related to the protection of susceptibles in a
population of protected individuals. However I have now seen a number of
references to herd immunity (in this newsgroup and Dec Nature Medicine
re Salk versus Sabin polio vaccine) which intimates that the protection
conferred by acquisition of the live vaacine from deliberately immunised
individuals to unimmunised individuals constitutes "herd immunity".
Isn't this an incorrect use of the term? I did not think herd immunity
related to protected individuals no matter how they acquired there
Like-minded postings and support is welcomed although a cogent argument
may sway me.