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

@TeaTears

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

Not disagreeing with you to say they can't, but vaccinated people can also catch it 2 or 3 times. Anyone can.

@Reallybadidea some places have extended it to 9 months. If more evidence comes out showing even longer immunity after infection then yes, I think it should be extended further.

Right, so why are you arguing that natural immunity is more durable than vaccine induced? Showing that natural is non-inferior is a lower threshold so easier to demonstrate. The argument that natural immunity is 'better' is irrelevant if you simply want equality. It just seems like you're trying to undermine the vaccines with your arguments.

@Scottishskifun it is durable in the majority, as shown above. I think you’ve missed the point that some people don’t want to have the vaccine. There really isn’t an argument for forcing someone to have a vaccine they don’t want (or need or they’re already immune). Their immune status should still allow them freedom to access certain venues etc. Some other countries have already recognised this.

@Reallybadidea I don’t think the studies are ‘undermining’ the vaccine. The vaccine has been shown to be very effective at protecting against serious illness, which, for many people is the most important aspect. In relation to passports though, the fact is that immunity after the vaccine is less protective against infection than previous infection is. So there is no reason to accept the vaccine, but not previous infection as proof of immunity.

Surely there is a difference though in the natural immunity of someone that tested positive on PCR for covid and had no or very mild symptoms and someone that was I'll, in bed for a week, hospitalised, has long covid etc. How can they tell the difference? Or have both been proven to be effective? Surely the immune response is stronger in the latter case and more likely to be protective/complete?

With vaccination I guess there is less variation in response, or less of a range at least?

@bumbleymummy and what are those people going to do after the 6-9 months country dependent...... Be back at square one moaning about it!

You can only really prove immune status and that your not one of those decreasing by taking regular antibody tests which as said get more complex as time passes.

As said many times its not the magical wand you portray and actually if you wanted long term immunity protection the research is showing the best combination is natural immunity and vaccination.

As also said multiple times your trying to say its better based on small cohorts compared to very large studies conducted for the vaccine. It's not comparable and should be treated with caution!

Your welcome to your soap box I'm off to book a holiday abroad 😉

[quote bumbleymummy]@Reallybadidea I don’t think the studies are ‘undermining’ the vaccine. The vaccine has been shown to be very effective at protecting against serious illness, which, for many people is the most important aspect. In relation to passports though, the fact is that immunity after the vaccine is less protective against infection than previous infection is. So there is no reason to accept the vaccine, but not previous infection as proof of immunity.[/quote]
No, I don't think the studies undermine vaccines either. But I think you are trying to do that by arguing something (natural immunity better than vaccine-induced) that is irrelevant to whether people who have had covid should be treated the same as those who have been vaccinated.

You can get a covid pass with immunity from infection though can’t you?

@Sonex there are some studies showing lasting immunity even after mild infection. I linked and quoted from one upthread.

@Scottishskifun

I would say that if the ongoing studies show that immunity lasts then the time for presumptive immunity will be increased again. We don’t currently ask people who have been infected to prove their immune status, we just assume they’re immune for a certain period of time (6/9 months currently) based on the findings from the studies.

Vaccinated people aren’t asked to ‘prove’ their immune status even though protection against infection wanes faster so I’m not sure why you think the bar should be set higher for natural immunity.

Re small studies, from hiqa:

“ The updated evidence summary identified 19 large cohort studies involving over 640,000 previously infected individuals, including six studies with over ten months’ follow-up. Across studies, the risk of SARS-CoV-2 reinfection was consistently found to be low. No study reported an increase in reinfection risk over time. More limited data were identified in relation to the immune response to SARS-CoV-2 infection. The identified studies suggest that immune memory develops in most or all people that have been infected with SARS-CoV-2 and lasts for at least nine months.”

@Reallybadidea

I’m not really sure what you want me to say. If the studies found that immunity after the vaccine and after infection were the same then that’s what I’d be saying. That’s not the case though. Again, I don’t think this evidence undermines the vaccine. Even if vaccinated people are infected then they are likely to have a mild illness. It does undermine the idea of vaccine passports though.

@Karwomannghia

You can get a covid pass with immunity from infection though can’t you?

Only for six months after a positive PCR. I've never had a positive PCR but I've had three positive antibody tests (one this month). No symptoms (covid or cold) since March 2020, if I get any I'll be getting a PCR to try to get a pass but until then I'm stuck as they aren't accepting antibodies as proof of immunity.

I'm stuck as they aren't accepting antibodies as proof of immunity.

Yep. This is very frustrating for people in your situation.