Peer-reviewed medical journal says natural infection provides better protection against reinfection than Pfizer or Moderna vaccine.
A recent publication in The Lancet, a peer-reviewed medical journal, asked whether natural infection from coronavirus or vaccine-acquired immunity better protected against future coronavirus infection.
“Understanding protection conferred by natural SARS-CoV-2 infection versus COVID-19 vaccination is important for informing vaccine mandate decisions,” the authors begin. “We compared protection conferred by natural infection versus that from the BNT162b2 (Pfizer–BioNTech) and mRNA-1273 (Moderna) vaccines in Qatar.”
After analyzing the data, the study authors found that for every COVID variant, natural immunity was significantly better at protecting against future infection than vaccination. “Previous natural infection was associated with lower incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection, regardless of the variant, than mRNA primary-series vaccination,” the authors state.
A chart in the publication shows that 37.1 out of 10,000 individuals who received Pfizer’s mRNA vaccine became reinfected with coronavirus while only 18.1 out of 10,000 among the natural infection cohort were reinfected.
The chart also showed that 32 out of 10,000 individuals receiving Moderna’s mRNA vaccine became reinfected while only 16.7 individuals with naturally acquired immunity were reinfected.
This means that those vaccinated with Pfizer’s jab were more than twice (105%) as likely to become reinfected with COVID than those with naturally acquired immunity. In other words, those with natural immunity had less than half the incidence of reinfection than those who received a Pfizer vaccine.
Those who received a Moderna jab were more than 91% more likely to be reinfected than the naturally immune.