Originally published May 17, 2023 7:20 am PDT
In a groundbreaking U.K. community-based population study, scientists have discovered that those who have previously been infected with SARS-CoV-2 demonstrate a lower rate of new Omicron BA.4/BA.5 infections compared to those who were vaccinated without any evidence of prior infection, according to a peer-reviewed Tuesday publication in the journal Nature.
This finding was established despite the fact that both breakthrough infection and booster vaccination significantly boosted anti-spike IgG antibody levels.
“Breakthrough infections generated similar antibody levels to third/booster vaccinations, and subsequent declines in antibody levels were similar or slightly slower than those after third/booster vaccinations,” the study states, highlighting the impressive resilience of the human immune response post-infection.
Importantly, the research shows that “the duration of protection after breakthrough infection was longer than after the third/booster vaccination.”
A key finding of the study was the discrepancy in the level of antibodies required to offer the same degree of protection against the Omicron BA.4/5 infections.
“The antibody level required to provide the same level of protection against Omicron BA.4/5 infection was >1000 BAU/mL in the same group, showing that much higher levels of antibodies against a wild-type trimeric spike antigen are needed to protect against new Omicron infection than new Delta infection,” the researchers noted.
This research also found that “the level of protection associated with a given antibody level was strongly affected by infection and vaccination history.”
The study states that among those with prior/breakthrough infection, “protection was highest for those infected with a more recent variant.”
This suggests that even as the virus evolves, the human immune system adapts and maintains a high level of defense against subsequent infections.
In terms of the overall duration of protection, the study found that “protection was short-lived following three vaccinations in individuals without previous infection.”
In contrast, the estimated duration was “longer following two vaccinations and breakthrough infection with Delta or Omicron BA.1, being 140–170 days and 180–315 days with primary ChAdOx1 and BNT162b2 courses, respectively.”
This again highlights the robustness of the immune response post-infection.
Significantly, the research emphasizes that “breakthrough infection leads to longer-lasting immunity and thus offers more durable protection against future infections, both from the same and different variants.”
This finding has “important implications” for public health policy, suggesting that for healthy individuals, previous infection could contribute to longer-lasting immunity than booster vaccinations.
As growing proportions of the population have “at least some level of immunity due to previous vaccinations and infections, combined with lower risks of severe outcomes from more recent SARS-CoV-2 variants, the potentially reduced benefits and ongoing high opportunity costs of vaccinating entire populations repeatedly should be carefully considered,” the study authors write.
The study concludes by stating, “Together our findings show breakthrough infection provides longer-lasting protection against further infections than booster vaccinations.”
However, it also stresses the need for further research to balance the costs and benefits of booster vaccination against the risk of hospitalization, mortality, and long-term consequences of infection.
Thirty-year Texas physician Dr. Richard Bartlett weighed in, noting that scientific studies consistently support the superiority of natural immunity over vaccine-induced attempts to replicate it.
“Natural immunity has existed for thousands of years. Once again, another scientific study demonstrates that natural immunity is superior to attempts to mimic it through vaccine-induced methods,” he told American Faith. “We were led to believe the fantasy that natural immunity was ineffective and performed poorly compared to experimental gene therapy. However, the evidence is undeniable and irrefutable.”
Bartlett also emphasized how former director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) Dr. Anthony Fauci, who, despite pushing COVID-19 vaccines on Americans, admitted on video decades ago that getting infected yourself is the most potent form of vaccination.
“In 2004, Fauci made a statement about natural immunity versus vaccinations,” said Bartlett. “It is likely that Fauci feels frustrated as there is video evidence of him saying, ‘The most potent vaccination is getting infected yourself.’”
The Nature article was published the day after U.S. Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL) unveiled a new report on the origins of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Senator Rubio’s 328-page report, titled “A Complex and Grave Situation,” investigates the political chronology of the SARS-COV-2 outbreak and presents a collection of circumstantial evidence pointing to a potential lab accident in Wuhan, China as the source of the pandemic.
“After years of censorship, there is growing evidence that some type of lab accident is responsible for the Covid-19 pandemic,” Sen. Rubio said.
The report, he emphasized, is a “groundbreaking look at what was happening in China during the years and months leading up to the known outbreak of the pandemic.”
The Florida congressman’s report also raises questions about the timing of China’s vaccine development efforts, revealing that Chinese scientists had filed a patent for a COVID-19 vaccine on February 24, 2020, indicating they “began work on the vaccine no later than November 2019, nearly two months before Beijing disclosed the existence of SARS-CoV-2.”