Trump is considering 'herd immunity', the failed Covid strategy which killed thousands in Europe

You're kidding, right?

 

Ahh. So less is better.

 

It's a lot higher. 70% required to to get the disease and be 'inoculated' from antibodies having had the disease, and current population is 330 million.

so, about 3% would die at current rates, to reach that number, and that figure is almost 6 million.

Not to mention that we don't even know the extent of immunity imparted by the antibodies. It might be strong, it might be weak, it might be only a few months, no one knows.
so, to kill 6 million people on complete gamble is the zenith of stupidity, it's reckless genocide. And that is what Scott Atlas is advising the president to do.

And the president is so mindbogglingly stupid he is promulgating the idea.

 

Always make your numbers opposition proof, thus, to prove a point, I often use a generally accepted minimum and/or maximum.

 

Who wants to ban masks? I certainly do not.

I don't use the mask, but that doesn't mean I want them banned. Such a ban would be unconstitutional.

So too, mandating masks is also unconstitutional, as the court ruled a few days ago.

Herd immunity is a natural process over which man has no control at all.

 

The US has killed thousands all over the world, and joked about it, as revealed on Collateral Murder.

We've killed thousands in Central and South America.

 

The Mayo Clinic puts herd immunity at 70%.

That's pretty credible.

Let's err on the side of caution. Put that number at 60% and you're looking at over 2 million dead to achieve herd immunity.

The nation...indeed the economy...could not withstands that

And yet that is the course that the White House is pursuing

 

Before you vote Biden remember he was not supportive of Trumps China travel ban that even Fauci said saved many thousands of lives.

 

What source says that 70% is required?

Literature from the manufacturers of vaccines?

Herd immunity is a natural biological process. In many locations we have reached it, no matter what MSM says.

 

Already did.

 

No. I get my information about science from science itself. That forum just happens to have a record of such information.

 

Nope.

I see you're not forming any arguments against it either...

 

Irrelevant.

 

Waiting still waiting.

 

Your source is not reliable, and lacks scholarship, as it's just from a forum such as this, with nothing backing it up. That that is so blatantly obvious to any serious debater, who would ever present such a thin source as 'debunked" I wondered if you were kidding.

If I were creating a course on how to debunk, and how not to debunk, I'd give your source on the 'how not to' aspect of the lesson..

 

The Mayo Clinic

 

Scholarship is an unnecessary requirement. It just needs to agree with science, logic, math, engineering, etc...

If I were creating a course on Logic 101, you would easily fail it.

 

Totally unpersuasive.

 

WTF

 

It worked for Sweden, without destroying their economy.