1. I haven’t been posting about reinfection for various reasons, but this one raises extremely important policy questions. The gentleman concerned was being tested for antibodies on a regular basis. He was still reinfected. https://academic.oup.com/cid/advance-article/doi/10.1093/cid/ciab014/6076528

2. His antibodies had not declined, but he experienced a second illness after infection with VOC-202012/01 lineage B.1.1.7. The second illness was more severe than the first. There are many questions that remain to be answered by this case and it is not a cause for alarm.

3. It does however raise serious questions about the government’s vaccinate to freedom strategy. If the presence of measurable antibodies does not necessarily protect against reinfection, how can older people safely integrate into normal life?

4. It may be that this case is an outlier and reinfection is very rare, but how does an individual make decisions about their risk if the government hasn’t tracked reinfection methodically and published data?

5. It is important to understand the combination of circumstances that lead to reinfection, so people can make informed choices about risk. The government seems to be following Great Barrington Declaration 2.0: focused protection through vaccines.