I'd prefer DJC's explanation. But I'll follow the science, wherever that leads. If it does transpire that Indians have stronger immunity against Covid, then so be it. But clear scientific evidence would be required rather than conjecture.
The 2 intuitive arguments against the idea would be:
Unfortunately, commonplace harsh and unsanitary conditions don't tend to confer stronger immunity. That's the reason why there has been so much concern for indigenous communities and minorities such as black Americans. Poorer access to healthcare and good nutrition leaves people more susceptible to Covid rather than more protected from it. Disadvantage reduces life expectancy rather than increasing it.
That's not to say that there aren't people who have a greater level of natural immunity against Covid. That's the benefit of genetic diversity through sexual reproduction. Clones produced by asexual reproduction would always have the same strengths and weaknesses. For species using that method of reproduction, a fatal new disease will wipe out the whole population. With sexual reproduction, some may well survive and allow the species to regenerate. There was even 1 guy, Stephen Crohn, who was totally resistant to HIV thanks to a genetic mutation. There was talk early on in the pandemic that some blood types may be less affected by Covid than other blood types. So I can buy the idea that there are some people in every community who have little to fear from Covid but I doubt that there are entire populations who have that golden ticket.
The 2 intuitive arguments against the idea would be:
- Indians are hardly a homogenous and closed demographic. Most of us would struggle to differentiate Indians from Pakistanis from Sri Lankans from Bangladeshis from Afghanis etc. That's because there's more than a little commonality there. If Indians had an impressive natural resistance, you'd expect that to be true of those other populations. That doesn't seem to be noted statistically.
- The argument that Indians have better immunity as they are exposed to more dirt and contamination has a surface plausibility. We've all heard that scientists believe that excessive cleanliness in Western households may have predisposed children to athsma and allergies. But this is a novel coronavirus. It's not as though Indians would be less likely to suffer colds and flu because many have been forced to deal with unsanitary conditions. And even if they had generated greater immunity against those coronaviruses, that wouldn't have given them an advantage against a novel coronavirus which requires a different response. After all, the flu vaccine didn't give anyone protection against Covid.
Unfortunately, commonplace harsh and unsanitary conditions don't tend to confer stronger immunity. That's the reason why there has been so much concern for indigenous communities and minorities such as black Americans. Poorer access to healthcare and good nutrition leaves people more susceptible to Covid rather than more protected from it. Disadvantage reduces life expectancy rather than increasing it.
That's not to say that there aren't people who have a greater level of natural immunity against Covid. That's the benefit of genetic diversity through sexual reproduction. Clones produced by asexual reproduction would always have the same strengths and weaknesses. For species using that method of reproduction, a fatal new disease will wipe out the whole population. With sexual reproduction, some may well survive and allow the species to regenerate. There was even 1 guy, Stephen Crohn, who was totally resistant to HIV thanks to a genetic mutation. There was talk early on in the pandemic that some blood types may be less affected by Covid than other blood types. So I can buy the idea that there are some people in every community who have little to fear from Covid but I doubt that there are entire populations who have that golden ticket.


