The study does show that omicron infection after vaccination does provide more immune response Vs those who have never had previous infection.

BUT it clearly states that broader cross-variant neutralization was observed after WA1 and Delta infections e.g those who were previously infected with previous strains but are unvaccinated.

The final paragraph also states "this, together with our
186 finding that Delta infection also elicits broad cross-variant neutralization in vaccinated individuals,
187 supports the inclusion of Omicron- and Delta-based immunogens in future heterologous or
188 multivalent vaccination strategies for broad protection against variants". SO, if you combine this with the research into Delta infection, which showed infection offered stronger follow up protection than the vaccine, you can also bolster the arguement for this article being misleading and misinformation given that it does not distinguish between unvaccinated with and without prior infection.

Therefore to say "unvaccinated" is misleading and it should state clearly "Natural immunity weakER and short-lived in unvaccinated WITHOUT PRIOR INFECTION after Omicron infection, BUT THOSE WITH PRIOR INFECTION OF PREVIOUS VARIANTS ALSO SHOWED STRONG NEUTRALIZATION"

I am not advocating for people to get infected to provide immunity, I am however in favour or proper journalism that provides all the facts Vs cherry picks.