It's also important to note that reinfection rates are likely substantially higher than Senator Paul indicated. A different testing protocol has to be used to document reinfection with COVID-19,...
On the heels of last month’s news of stunning results from Pfizer’s and Moderna’s experimental Covid-19 vaccines, Senator Rand Paul tweeted a provocative comparison.
The new vaccines were 90 percent and 94.5 percent effective, Mr. Paul, Republican of Kentucky, said. But “naturally acquired” Covid-19 was even better, at 99.9982 percent effective, he claimed.
Mr. Paul is one of many people who, weary of lockdowns and economic losses, have extolled the benefits of contracting the coronavirus. The senator was diagnosed with the disease this year and has argued that surviving a bout of Covid-19 confers greater protection than getting vaccinated.
The trouble with that logic is that it’s difficult to predict who will survive an infection unscathed, said Jennifer Gommerman, an immunologist at the University of Toronto. Given all of the unknowns — like a region’s hospital capacity, or the strength of a person’s immune response — choosing the disease over the vaccine is “a very bad decision,” she said.
It's also important to note that reinfection rates are likely substantially higher than Senator Paul indicated. A different testing protocol has to be used to document reinfection with COVID-19, and it's not widely available.
It's also important to note that reinfection rates are likely substantially higher than Senator Paul indicated. A different testing protocol has to be used to document reinfection with COVID-19, and it's not widely available.