0 shots... obviously?
Vaccines don't actually protect you against the virus, they just activate your immune system (your body's natural protection). Guess what else also activates the immune system? The actual virus!
At the beginning of the pandemic, there was some talk that anti-bodies might not last longer than 3 months, but that was obviously just FUD (there was literally no data). I had antibodies 6 months after being infected. Two additional things I heard (but don't have the source), your body can restart production of antibodies (B-cells remember), and people had SARS(-CoV-1) antibodies years after infection.
Finally, this: https://www.ft.com/content/929ef3cd-8611-49b2-9f23-918dc3470... Covid infection shown to provide as much immunity as vaccines - I haven't checked the source but FT isn't really known for fake news.
Are there any credible studies that say that infection doesn't confer immunity?
Something can feel instinctively correct and not be correct. For example, the sun going around the earth, or the earth being flat, for that matter.
I'm not saying it should be 0, 1, 2 or 10 shots; I'm saying the answer is absolutely not obvious, even if you instinctively want to say zero.
In a world where we're lacking information, the default should probably be zero. But given that this is a worldwide pandemic, we're not going to be running out of information any time soon, so it's good it's being studied.
There's a case of someone close to me that works in the ER that was positive around November with very little symptoms, got cured and now has it again but with stronger symptoms.
And from the antibodies tests done to the health personal in that hospital, it seems some people get good antibody response and others not so much.
Of course! Economic studies said that vaccine manufacturers might not make as much of their investment back if infection confers immunity, so we can conclude that infection doesn't confer immunity.
The immunity induced by the vaccines is said to be potentially more effective and/or longer-lasting than the immunity obtained from a prior infection.
There is also an open question about whether people who are sufficiently immune from prior infection that they won't get serious symptoms are still able to pass the virus to others during a "fighting it off again successfully" phase.
Immunity is not a simple yes-no boolean. It's not even a single variable, because there are different parts of the immune system memory.
Isn't this just as much an open question with vaccines? AFAIK the main vaccine trials were only checking for symptoms (so you could still be asymptomatic & transmitting the virus).
https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/30/politics/stephen-lynch-tests-...
It's worth basically nothing. We already know it's 95% effective; someone has to be the 5%, and there's a publication bias towards reporting on those.
I fail to any disadvantage of "0 shots" other than people not getting the vaccine because they think they had covid but didn't.
But then again the entire public policy around covid has been to treat the entire population as morons that wouldn't make the decisions thought to be correct on their own.
It's entirely possible that the vaccine also lowers the infectiousness. We don't know either way, though, because the data from the studies isn't in yet.