What if instead of optimizing for "targeting" a "specific virus", i.e. score political points against a virus, you wanted to optimize for saving lives? That doesn't even come into your calculations, does it?
I was explaining why there's potentially a difference between natural immunity and vaccine-mediated immunity, and why one of these may well be preferable if the goal is to generate maximum immunity to a widespread virus. But that's not the actual goal, and as a result policy decisions may differ. Is the risk associated with vaccinating people who have some degree of natural immunity justified by any improvement in immunity they gain as a result? I don't know! I have opinions on the matter, but I'm not qualified to make that determination.
is this going well for you
I didn't realize I was supposed to be playing for high score; I think I've dug into the truth a bit though.