TThe US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) failed to recognize that people with confirmed Covid infection, also known as “natural immunity,” achieve some level of protection against subsequent infection and severe illness. This has fueled unnecessary divisions, especially when vaccination is mandatory without acknowledging that Covid was previously an alternative route, albeit with some limitations, to protect individuals and help build a population’s immune wall.
While there is a data set that supports a robust immune response to Covid infection, this evidence has recently been greatly enhanced. In Johnson and Johnson’s massive vaccine trial, one shot Compared with placebo, over 2,000 participants with previous infection, as documented by their positive antibody status, their protection against moderate or severe disease was 90%. This is well above the 56% efficacy of the vaccine, but the CDC recognizes these two parts of the vaccine as “fully immune” but ignores this data and many other points of evidence for natural immune protection.
CDC’s latest report on Covid in California That includes delta waves, the cumulative hospitalization rate for vaccinated persons was 0.7% among vaccinated and 0.3% unvaccinated with a previous infection. In particular, a 10-fold lower risk of subsequent infection was found in persons with normal immunity compared to those who were vaccinated Cleveland Clinical Health System Study more than 52,000 employees. These reports convey high levels of protection for innate immunity, sometimes comparable to two vaccines. Some of the following studies A person who is at least 15 months old The Covid infection shows its tenacity Antibody level And sel memori b. Re-infection among those with natural immunity during the pandemic, up to the last Omicron wave, was very low, at less than 1%. English Studies Of the nearly 9,000 people with previous infections, they showed more than 90% protection from subsequent infections, even among those who contracted Covid more than 18 months ago.
If there is good protection against infection, why is a single dose of vaccine necessary and sufficient? New report of nearly 150,000 people infected with Covid in IsraelWith about half being vaccinated, compared with others who were not vaccinated, there was an 82% lower risk of reinfection for people aged 16 to 64 years, and 60% for people aged 65 years or older. There was no difference in protection with more than one dose of vaccine. The same was found in other studies. Both were performed during delta waves, but we now have data on Omicron, the type of virus that evades our immune system the most. and prove, di QatarWhile the innate immune protection was around 90% for the previous alpha, beta and gamma variants, it dropped to 56% for the omicron. In the UK, the risk of re-infection for people with previous Covid has risen to a level of 16 times seen previously. after A Cleveland Clinic Omicron wave study of nearly 8000 people with normal immunityOne shot of the vaccine significantly reduces the risk of infection and 2 or 3 injections has no additional prophylactic benefit. Similar results were consistent in Israeli and British studies: one shot worked, no additional protection from two or three shots. In fact, reduced protection after one year was avoided in a UK study with a single dose of the vaccine.
Previous criticisms of natural immune protection remain relevant. These studies contain a survivor bias – they only include people who have survived the infection. We know that the symptoms of Long Covid can be reduced by vaccination, which is an important added advantage of the controlled vaccine approach compared to sequelae of unpredictable duration of chronic infection, which can be disabling, even when mild. Although about 90% of infected people develop antibodies and memory B and T cells, this leaves some people with no immune response, which seems to be more of a problem when a person has no symptoms, or if symptoms are very mild. Because we did not assess the level of antibodies, particularly those capable of neutralizing the virus, and we did not measure the T cell response, there is a blind spot in knowing an individual’s level of protection, whether it be through infection or vaccination.
Which brings us to hybrid immunity. It would be rash to recommend someone knowingly catch Covid. However, for those who are infected, their immune response is directed across the virus while our vaccine is specific to the pointed protein. The result of combining different immune responses is synergistic, not additive, strong and long-lasting protection, 25 to 100 times more responsive to antibodies and more widespread against viral variants.
It is clear that now is the time for the United States and the CDC to recognize natural immunity as a route of partial protection, as many countries have done before. The term “complete vaccine” needs to be redefined. For people who have received two doses of the mRNA vaccine, without previous infection, a third dose, a booster, is needed to protect against severe and occasional illness. On the other hand, for people with natural immunity, with evidence of a positive PCR test, only one injection is needed to be considered “fully immune”.
By demonstrating immunity certificates in this way, the polarization will be bridged between the natural and vaccine-inducing immune camps, at least to some extent. The evidence has been overwhelming and its implementation as a policy is likely to help raise the low US vaccination rate of 64%, the worst ranking out of 60 countries in the world, to much higher levels, further building an entire population’s immune wall.
It’s also about sticking with science when large and growing data sets can’t be ignored. One can fully understand why vaccine mandates are denied when there is evidence of the protection afforded by infection. Now, with the development of the virus, we are at a time when natural immunity alone is not enough, but one dose is as good as three.
–
