Post-infection immunity might be a strange topic for political strife, but it touches on COVID-19 vaccine mandates and whether those who’ve had the virus should be exempt. And so when publications such as The Hill run headlines such as "CDC Finally Recognizing Natural Immunity — Legislators should Follow,” it carries the implication the CDC has been ignoring some long-held scientific evidence. But the science is more complicated and unsettled than that.

The relevant science question isn’t whether natural immunity exists but whether it’s as protective and lasts as long as vaccine-induced immunity. Studies have given conflicting answers. The situation is now changing again, as the BA.2 variant is starting to take over. It’s still considered omicron, but it looks to be wildly different from the version of omicron that’s been dominant, called BA.1.

Unable to view this article?

This could be due to a conflict with your ad-blocking or security software.

Please add japantimes.co.jp and piano.io to your list of allowed sites.

If this does not resolve the issue or you are unable to add the domains to your allowlist, please see out this support page.

We humbly apologize for the inconvenience.

In a time of both misinformation and too much information, quality journalism is more crucial than ever.
By subscribing, you can help us get the story right.