Saying natural immunity is best is really not smart. This means that you must get sick to acquire it and possibly really sick. This is exactly what vaccines are trying to avoid.
In principle it is smart to prime your immune system with a vaccine. Then if you get still sick, you will mostly gain benefits from natural immunity.
There are still risks involved because instead of single protein in fixed configuration you will get 29 of them in bioactive forms but at least you have greatly reduced your risk.
True, but to me it makes no sense to force people who already have built immunity to a recent strain to get vaccinated against an ancient strain.
Why is existing natural immunity treated like an inferior sibling of being vaccinated (or even ignored completely), even when it provides the most up-to-date protection?
Comments
Saying natural immunity is best is really not smart. This means that you must get sick to acquire it and possibly really sick. This is exactly what vaccines are trying to avoid.
In principle it is smart to prime your immune system with a vaccine. Then if you get still sick, you will mostly gain benefits from natural immunity.
There are still risks involved because instead of single protein in fixed configuration you will get 29 of them in bioactive forms but at least you have greatly reduced your risk.
True, but to me it makes no sense to force people who already have built immunity to a recent strain to get vaccinated against an ancient strain.
Why is existing natural immunity treated like an inferior sibling of being vaccinated (or even ignored completely), even when it provides the most up-to-date protection?