|
|
|
|
|
by dartharva
2053 days ago
|
|
The paper in question: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7444648/pdf/mai... It is indeed very interesting and worthy of consideration that Indians and other people from poor countries with lesser hygiene may be more immune to COVID infections. India's government lifted its infamous lockdowns at times when the number of active cases only seemed to be flying upwards and had no anticipations of coming down anytime soon. In a poor, extremely overpopulated country with high rates of overcrowding and very low hygiene standards, coupled with rampant unemployment and economic distress, anyone could have only expected the situation to worsen. And it did - the country's GDP shrunk by almost a quarter and cases continued to pile up... until they didn't. The number of active cases miraculously peaked mid-November and have been in a healthy downward trend since. While developed countries like the UK seem to have their number of active cases shoot up exponentially, many states in India are experiencing a net decrease in cases to very safe levels. Even infamously overcrowded states like Uttar Pradesh are displaying impressive levels of recovery. One has to reckon there must be something more to it than just government interventions and change in attitudes. |
|
Having said that, there's molecular biological evidence of cross immunity to other forms of coronavirus so there might very well be something to it.
I've wondered along these lines if keeping kids out of schools might in some ways be counter productive, by decreasing exposure to other coronaviruses or other pathogens that increase immunity.
I've often wanted to see if, eg, parents of young children, or people working with young children (teachers, pediatricians, etc) have less severe outcomes from sars-cov-2 than matched controls.