Truth is indeed stranger than fiction at times, and this is a good example of one.

They know that, having natural immunity, he actually has better resistance against the virus than a vaccinated person, and so poses no threat to the community. (BTW, that story linked was in the AP a few days ago, but they have deleted it.)

Beyond the fuckupedness of this as it is, it's also very disturbing because it sets a precedent. Now, anything that may affect how the masses think is subject to censorship and, I presume, eventually criminal action. Isn't it like that already in China? And more recently in Hong Kong?