3 ms·

I would agree with the other sibling reply that asking for citation for natural immunity vs vaccine protection is a bit like asking for a citation for claiming

I would agree with the other sibling reply that asking for citation for natural immunity vs vaccine protection is a bit like asking for a citation for claiming that frozen water floats. Sure, you could prove it but it's a well accepted understanding in epidemiology and virology. It's only lately been.... Politicized.

epgui 5y ago
This is pretty close to my area of expertise, and I don't think this is a well established principle at all.
heurisko 5y ago
I was reading this article recently about natural vs vaccine immunity (mostly in adults I think). Didn't seem to reach any strong conclusions either way. > “It appears from the literature that natural infection provides immunity, but that immunity is seemingly not as strong and may not be as long lasting as that provided by the vaccine... > But not everyone agrees with this interpretation. “The data we have right now suggests that there probably isn’t a whole lot of difference” in terms of immunity to the spike protein > Memoli highlights real world data such as the Cleveland Clinic study18 and points out that while “vaccines are focused on only that tiny portion of immunity that can be induced” by the spike, someone who has had covid-19 was exposed to the whole virus, “which would likely offer a broader based immunity” that would be more protective against variants. The laboratory study offered by the FDA22 “only has to do with very specific antibodies to a very specific region of the virus [the spike],” says Memoli. “Claiming this as data supporting that vaccines are better than natural immunity is shortsighted and demonstrates a lack of understanding of the complexity of immunity to respiratory viruses.” https://www.bmj.com/content/374/bmj.n2101 https://www.bmj.com/content/374/bmj.n2101
- chana_masala 5y ago
  Look into Measles vs MMR or pertussis and the pertussis vaccine

epgui 5y ago

This is pretty close to my area of expertise, and I don't think this is a well established principle at all.

heurisko 5y ago

I was reading this article recently about natural vs vaccine immunity (mostly in adults I think). Didn't seem to reach any strong conclusions either way. > “It appears from the literature that natural infection provides immunity, but that immunity is seemingly not as strong and may not be as long lasting as that provided by the vaccine... > But not everyone agrees with this interpretation. “The data we have right now suggests that there probably isn’t a whole lot of difference” in terms of immunity to the spike protein > Memoli highlights real world data such as the Cleveland Clinic study18 and points out that while “vaccines are focused on only that tiny portion of immunity that can be induced” by the spike, someone who has had covid-19 was exposed to the whole virus, “which would likely offer a broader based immunity” that would be more protective against variants. The laboratory study offered by the FDA22 “only has to do with very specific antibodies to a very specific region of the virus [the spike],” says Memoli. “Claiming this as data supporting that vaccines are better than natural immunity is shortsighted and demonstrates a lack of understanding of the complexity of immunity to respiratory viruses.” https://www.bmj.com/content/374/bmj.n2101 https://www.bmj.com/content/374/bmj.n2101

chana_masala 5y ago
Look into Measles vs MMR or pertussis and the pertussis vaccine