> aggressive dismissal and censorship of natural immunity
The 'natural immunity' argument never makes sense if you think about it. You're comparing the chances of a SECOND covid infection of an unvaccinated person to a vaccinated person's first infection. If you compare vaccinated vs unvaccinated people and their chances of their first and second covid infections, the vaccinated person wins in both cases.
Also, the first infection is the riskiest one. So going through the riskiest infection to get immunity for a second, less risky infection doesn't really make sense.
If it's about whether someone who had covid already should count as being vaccinated, maybe. But that also risks incentivizing people catching covid on purpose instead of taking the vaccine.
The 'natural immunity' argument never makes sense if you think about it. You're comparing the chances of a SECOND covid infection of an unvaccinated person to a vaccinated person's first infection. If you compare vaccinated vs unvaccinated people and their chances of their first and second covid infections, the vaccinated person wins in both cases.
Also, the first infection is the riskiest one. So going through the riskiest infection to get immunity for a second, less risky infection doesn't really make sense.
If it's about whether someone who had covid already should count as being vaccinated, maybe. But that also risks incentivizing people catching covid on purpose instead of taking the vaccine.