I'll read it, although it tracks that the third booster also infers lack of long term resistance. I'm hoping for a direct comparison of natural vs. vaccine effectiveness in the article, as it concerns that specifically. As a rule, I have slowed down my clicking on links if they sound a little too insistent that they should be believed.
edit :
Quote:
|
The bottom line: Contrary to the narrative being pushed, for COVID-19 “natural immunity” is not superior to vaccine-induced immunity, which is less variable and more reliable. Even if it were, yet again, I must emphasize that vaccine-induced immunity has a key advantage over post-infection immunity. It doesn’t require you to suffer through the illness and face the risks of severe disease and death from the disease to acquire it.
|
Ok, so the article is almost entirely a rebuttal of misuse of the term and reality of natural immunity. It doesn't discount the effectiveness of a combination post-disease/vaccination. Directly under the citation attached to the quote on 1/3 of post-disease patients not having effective anti-bodies, is a link to a post-disease/vaccination study.
I just think that post vaccine/vaccination should be considered for the passport mandate, and post vaccine/vaccination/2nd shot is an unnecessary risk.