For good reason - it's extremely easy to take the opposite headline out of context. Taking Dr. Martin Makary's quote out of context and turning it into a headline, for example (and I'm extremely hesitant to even post this):the CDC and other sources have worked overtime to suppress the natural immunity story. This MMWR headline:
Vaccination Offers Higher Protection than Previous COVID-19 Infection
clearly wants us to believe a lie -- that vaccines are more effective than natural immunity. The text reveals they actually tested infection + vaccine vs. infection w/o vaccine. The study did NOT evaluate infection vs. vaccine as the headline claims.
Natural Immunity After COVID-19 Infection Offers 27 Times Higher Protection Than Vaccines
How do you think anyone that has any hesitance to vaccines is going to react after seeing that headline? How many people are going to read below the headline that taking that path also means you're something like 100x more likely to die from COVID and 50x more likely to be hospitalized 5x more likely to get it?
One path for long-term COVID-19 immunity with minimal side-effects seems to be to receive a series of 3 COVID vaccine shots spaced apart.
Should you happen to be infected by COVID-19, you can probably replace one of these shots.
All this talk about natural immunity vs vaccine, there is a downside. An article today says that 1/3 of people who get COVID have some long haul symptoms for at least 6 months.
Long Covid is a bigger problem than we thought
Absolutely, and being vaccinated doesn't necessarily fully protect you against this as well, as I know someone who was fully vaxed, got covid and still hasn't fully regained their sense of smell 2 months later.