“This piece is a summary of Herd Immunity and Immunization Policy: The Importance of Accuracy, soon to be published in v. 94 of Oregon Law Review.
In an article that was published in the Oregon Law Review in 2014, authors Holland and Zachary claimed that school immunization mandates are inappropriate because they reject the concept that herd immunity works.
This piece will explain why Holland and Zachary’s analysis is simply incorrect. And let’s be clear–there is a legitimate debate about whether school immunization mandates are appropriate, policy wise, as a response to non-vaccination.”http://www.skepticalraptor.com/skepticalraptorblog.php/yes-herd-immunity-works/
Full article: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2591591
This article explains why claims made by Holland and Zachary in their article, Herd Immunity and Compulsory Childhood Vaccination: Does the Theory Justify the Law?, are incorrect and untenable. The authors misunderstand the nature of society’s duty to children, which is not similar to duty in torts but draws from the state’s role in protecting vulnerable children when their parents do not act in their best interests. Their view of herd immunity is also incorrect: the article does not well define the term, ignores data showing that herd immunity works, and their discussion of their two examples is inaccurate: close examination of those examples actually shows the role of herd immunity in protecting against disease. Finally, the authors’ analysis does not support their claim that mandates are unnecessary.”