The study claims that two doses of COVID-19 vaccine provide better protection against coronavirus than natural immunity. By itself, natural infection prevents 65% of people from contracting the virus again. But two vaccines reduce the risk by 71-80%. However, experts still disagree as to which type of immunity provides the most protection.
Researchers continue to debate whether COVID vaccines provide better protection than natural immunity. The true extent of immunity against coronavirus remains a mystery, the Daily Mail notes.
Some studies have shown that natural contamination provides more protection than any vaccine. But Britain’s largest coronavirus symptom tracking app has now given way to injections. Experts at King’s College London and health technology firm ZOE, which launched the software, say natural contamination alone stops 65 percent of people from becoming infected with the virus. But two doses of the AstraZeneca vaccine were about 71% effective, and the Pfizer vaccine was even stronger: the double dose course provided about 80% protection after six months.
Professor Tim Spector, the lead scientist behind the app, said: “Regardless of which vaccine is administered, this study shows that having a natural COVID infection before double vaccination means more protection.”
Despite the findings, the study also showed that natural immunity does not weaken for at least a year, while protection from vaccines can weaken after three months.
But experts say other studies show a natural infection offers the same protection as a shot from Pfizer, but “more effective than AstraZeneca.”
Experts have previously argued that natural infection is the best form of defense against the virus, especially in young people who only receive one dose. This has given rise to arguments against vaccinating children, who are at a much lower risk of severe illness from the virus and are more likely to suffer from a very rare side effect of heart inflammation called myocarditis.
However, it is difficult to determine which option provides the best protection. One study found that natural immunity can provide 13 times more protection against infection than two doses of Pfizer vaccine.
The ZOE team noted that vaccine efficacy does not necessarily decline after six months, but they have no data outside of that time frame. But those who contracted COVID and then vaccinated twice with the AstraZeneca (90 percent) or Pfizer (94 percent) vaccines have the strongest protection against contracting the virus.
The results, based on real data from more than one million vaccinated Britons and test results from May to July, also showed that the immune response from infection lasts up to 15 months. Meanwhile, according to the ZOE, vaccination protection begins to wane after three months. The researchers explained that this means that people who become infected with the coronavirus and then were vaccinated “are likely to maintain a higher level of protection against COVID for longer than those who were not infected” prior to vaccination.
Prof Spector added: “This is indeed positive news for overall immunity in the UK and means that a large number of people will receive effective and long-term protection from COVID. It is also compelling evidence of the need for vaccination, even for those who have already suffered from COVID. “
University of East Anglia medical expert Professor Paul Hunter said in a comment to MailOnline that the findings are “worthwhile confirmation” from studies that have already shown that infection improves vaccine protection. He said, “You can think of a natural infection as a booster shot.” As the virus becomes endemic, he said, people are likely to be reinfected every few years.
Professor Hunter said that “the latest data on the Delta variant suggests that natural infection is about as effective as Pfizer, but more effective than Astrazeneca.”
Dr. Alexander Edwards, an immunologist at the University of Reading, told MailOnline: “It’s really amazing, but it’s much more difficult for us to determine how effective natural infections are than vaccines. On the one hand, our immune system responds very well to many different infections. However, viruses and bacteria have tricks to avoid immunity, and COVID is no exception. On the contrary, vaccines have been developed solely to provide potent immunity directly against the most important viral target – the spike on the outside – and so we are indeed pleased, but perhaps not surprised, to find that they provide such superior protection. The way vaccines work triggers a potent antibody response to this very target. We can measure these antibodies, and they are usually higher after vaccination than after infection, so we really expect vaccines to provide better protection than natural infection, because these “virus neutralizing antibodies” are very important. They bind and purify the virus, preventing it from entering our cells – so in general, the observations of the ZOE study are a great relief for immunologists, confirming what they hoped for. “
.