> fully vaccinated people who get infected Emphasis added. These are a smaller percentage than unvaccinated people who get infected. So if you cherry-pick that

> fully vaccinated people who get infected Emphasis added. These are a smaller percentage than unvaccinated people who get infected. So if you cherry-pick that group (who got vaccinated then got infected) and then say "look, it's the same as the unvaccinated", well that's not giving an accurate picture. > latest data from the article is proving that natural immunity (which is lifelong and protects against variants) is king. For the benefit of people reading this, this idea that "natural is better" does not appear to be correct: "The evidence shows that protective antibodies generated in response to an mRNA vaccine will target a broader range of SARS-CoV-2 variants ... compared to antibodies acquired from an infection." https://directorsblog.nih.gov/2021/06/22/how-immunity-generated-from-covid-19-vaccines-differs-from-an-infection/ https://directorsblog.nih.gov/2021/06/22/how-immunity-genera... "Vaccination offers longer, stronger immunity" https://www.jhsph.edu/covid-19/articles/why-covid-19-vaccines-offer-better-protection-than-infection.html https://www.jhsph.edu/covid-19/articles/why-covid-19-vaccine... "Why a vaccine can provide better immunity than an actual infection" https://theconversation.com/why-a-vaccine-can-provide-better-immunity-than-an-actual-infection-145476 https://theconversation.com/why-a-vaccine-can-provide-better...