Originally Posted by shuttlt
People keep talking as if artifical immunity fades, but that isn't what the CDC says (as previously quoted):
Originally Posted by CDC
Most children who get the vaccine develop immunity to all three diseases (over 99% for measles and 95% for mumps and rubella). Protection is believed to be life-long.
If it's lifelong and 99% effective (in the case of measles), I don't see where there is much room for a natural immunity to do much better. Perhaps, how many children they mean by 'most' is where the difference lies?
The problem is looking you right in the face as to whether vaccine protection is life long. The CDC uses the words "believed to be" because it doesn't actually know but wants you to think it is life long because they say it is.
But what the CDC does know is that there are outbreaks all the time in completely vaccinated populations and nearly completely vaccinated populations. They have had to add the first booster for the MMR because they started to realize that the protection does indeed wear off. They are considering another booster for adolescents. If you look hard enough, you will find info were they know this is the case.
They also have admitted that the viruses mutate, such as they found out in the mumps outbreak a couple years ago. The would really like for adults to get some of these childhood vaccines such as the whooping cough one because they know that adults are not part of the herd and spread it around.
With natural immunity you do not have to worry about these things.
Even if 99% had antibodies for measles at time of injection (which is really where there numbers would be coming from), because of the wearing off, these same group of people would not still be at 99%.