Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

The Science article's[1] subheading quotes: "Israelis who had an infection were more protected against the Delta coronavirus variant than those who had an already highly effective COVID-19 vaccine"

[1]https://www.science.org/content/article/having-sars-cov-2-on...




https://ncrc.jhsph.edu/research/comparing-sars-cov-2-natural...

"In addition, individuals who were previously infected who received one dose of the Pfizer vaccine were even more protected from breakthrough infection than the naturally infected group. There were no deaths in any of the groups examined. Given that previously infected individuals may have had multiple infections prior to the study period, the overall applicability of the study to all populations needs more clarification. Lastly, these findings should not be taken as an endorsement that getting infected is a better overall option for protection than the highly effective vaccines that are available as only those who survived initial infection were eligible for analysis."


Isn't that apples and oranges comparisons? They're not talking effective rates only relative rates. They could also claim having mRNA + adenovirus vaccines improve efficacy (not sure if there is such a study) but that does not say anything about mRNA vs adenovirus by themselves.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: