1 Comment

The article was designed to provide support for boosters.

"The rapid decline in protection against omicron infection that was conferred by vaccination and previous infection provides support for booster vaccination."

Unfortunately it's just an example of propaganda masquerading as science. One can see this by just looking at how they try to make vaccine effectiveness seem better by quoting the estimated percentages:

Paragraph 4: "The immunity acquired from SARS-CoV-2 infection was high, although it waned over time. Among unvaccinated children, the estimated effectiveness of omicron infection against reinfection with omicron was 90.7% (95% CI, 89.2 to 92.0) at 2 months and 62.9% (95% CI, 58.8 to 66.6) at 4 months (Figure 1C and Table S4). Among vaccinated children, the estimated effectiveness of omicron infection alone against reinfection with omicron was 94.3% (95% CI, 91.6 to 96.1) at 2 months and 79.4% (95% CI, 73.8 to 83.8) at 4 months ."

The article is littered with such biased reporting, slanted to try to suppress the damage being caused.

Expand full comment