Does having had Covid count as being vaccinated?

[Falcor]

Just that really. For non uk travellers coming over for a short trip?

Thank you beforehand

Doubt it

No

No www.gov.uk/guidance/travel-to-england-from-another-country-during-coronavirus-covid-19

It should do. You’re better protected if you’ve had Covid than if you’ve only been vaccinated.

www.gov.uk/guidance/travel-to-england-from-another-country-during-coronavirus-covid-19

@Umbro02

It should do. You’re better protected if you’ve had Covid than if you’ve only been vaccinated.

Where has that cone feom? My understanding is the opposite is the case

Not according to the people who have had covid two or three times already.

@Umbro02

It should do. You’re better protected if you’ve had Covid than if you’ve only been vaccinated.

Do you have a link for this better protection from having covid than having the vaccines?

It should do. You’re better protected if you’ve had Covid than if you’ve only been vaccinated

Rubbish.

No

Why is that rubbish? Doesn’t our basic scientific knowledge about contracting diseases and illnesses in relation to immune systems apply anymore? Isn’t that the basis of how vaccines work?

I believe in France, if you've already had Covid either they won't let you have the first dose until 6 months later or once you've had 1st dose you're not eligible for 2nd if you've already had Covid.

Something like that

But it was several months ago when their vaccination program was dire compared with over here in the UK

www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-01442-9

I’ve googled this really quickly. Don’t know if this is a reliably source. But these findings and others are everywhere now. It’s commonly accepted that vaccine immunity lasts for much much less time and is inferior.

Not for the UK.
For some EU countries proof of recovery and within a 6 month time frame allows exemption to testing and quarantine but not here.

As for the pp who said it provides better protection actually its about a 60-70% protection, vaccination for AZ is about the same for protection of catching covid but into 94% against serious illness. Pfizer is 90% against catching it for first 6 months and again 95% against serious issues.

The best protection is actually having the virus then being double vaccinated which studies are showing is 94% effective at not catching covid but same level of protection against serious issues from the vaccination

Immunity after infection lasts 9-12 months in the majority and a recent paper in nature showed broader memory B-cell protection after natural infection compared to the vaccine.

I agree that previous infection should be taken as proof of immunity. The European green pass includes proof of infection in the last 6 months.

Pfizer is 90% against catching it for first 6 months

No it isn’t. It’s much lower against infection but still high against serious illness.

no

When it’s stated that immunity lasts for 9-12 months, is that definitive or is that because that’s all the test data there currently is? It used to be 6 months, because there wasn’t data for a longer time frame, now it’s a year? Will we find out it’s 2 years next year?

Thank you very much for your quick answers.

I have relatives that are travelling to the UK and one has had covid and not been vaccinated and the other one can not get covid because of medical reasons. It seems like the Jansen should qualify for one of them but Is the medical reason accepted in the uk?

Sorry I know I can google. But it really is a jungle of information

@bumbleymummy

Pfizer is 90% against catching it for first 6 months

No it isn’t. It’s much lower against infection but still high against serious illness.

Apologies is 88% for the first 5-6 months then reduces

covid.joinzoe.com/post/covid-vaccine-protection-fading

@Beechview

When it’s stated that immunity lasts for 9-12 months, is that definitive or is that because that’s all the test data there currently is? It used to be 6 months, because there wasn’t data for a longer time frame, now it’s a year? Will we find out it’s 2 years next year?

Very possibly. It looks promising so far. Immunity to the previous SARS virus has lasted 17 years. Wouldn’t it be great if it did?

I always wanted to ask you. You think the natural immunity is better than the vaccine immunity, right?. I know you haven't been vaccinated, have you had Covid, @bumbleymummy?
You keep saying majority of people have had covid. But I know no one who had it around me, including my dc who goes to state school.

@Umbro02

www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-01442-9

I’ve googled this really quickly. Don’t know if this is a reliably source. But these findings and others are everywhere now. It’s commonly accepted that vaccine immunity lasts for much much less time and is inferior.

But that's not what that article says.

No. Immunity from infection is ignored in the UK as it doesn't fit with the vaccinate everyone agenda.

I do think having had covid should be treated same as vaccinated, as for having some immunity. But seeking natural immunity when you can get vaccinated is silly.
It's really weird, in a country most people are quite logical, they do seem to think natural immunity as same as vaccine immunity. But in the country like US or UK, where there are so many anti vaxxers, they seems to ignore natural immunity? I don't think it's nothing to do with agenda, it's most likely to do with % of vaccinated, UK isn't leading anymore like it used to, which is a shame.