Why coronavirus dare to touch many?

If we analyse the total number of people who turned positive for novel coronavirus out of the total population in any given country, one thing becomes quite evident and obvious, that is, the large proportion of the population in all most all countries in the world are not even turned positive for the virus; let alone they being asymptomatic or remains with mild symptoms of COVID 19?   

Should we therefore assume that all those people who are not even positive for the virus are strictly following the norms of social distancing, wearing mask, washing hands frequently, have taken all necessary precautions and hence have not contracted the virus? 

Or else, the virus is deliberately avoiding all of them and infect only a few select people may be based on some selection criteria which is best known only to the virus.   In any case the political and or the bureaucratic nepotism or recommendation based infectivity of certain people by the novel coronavirus looks remote and impossible.  

Then we must ask a new question that is about the defence mechanism in certain people possibly evicting the virus as soon as it enters or not even allowing the virus to touch them and hence they turned negative for the virus by RT PCR.  If such possibility exist in human population in all countries in the world means, how we can say immune defence is not possible against the virus and the scope of reinfection in those who are already infected is very much possible. 

It is foolish to assume that those who did not contract the virus may not have the receptors for the virus to adhere.  Does that mean vast majority of the people does not have the receptor for the adherence of novel coronavirus and only the rest has the receptor and based on the abundance of the receptor sites, the viral adhesion and subsequent multiplication are occurring and that results in different clinical situations such as asymptomatic, those with mild symptoms and full blown COVID 19.  

Doesn’t that probability or hypothesis look incredible and bizarre?  

Does that mean, some people alone have the receptors for the virus to adhere and hence develop medical complications due to the virus?  If so, the old people or young people have such receptors? 

If we look at the data on the age related mortality rate due to COVID 19, it become clear that people of all age groups have died due to COVID 19 but the proportion of death among elderly population is relatively high when compared to the death rate in younger population.  The above possibility at least partly demolishes the receptor site mediated infection of novel coronavirus.

It is hard to assume that the vast majority of people all over the world have followed strict social distancing norms, are always wearing mask, washing hands frequently and therefore the novel coronavirus could not even gently touch them.  The receptor for the viral adherence may be present only in a few people in any given population is also equally difficult to accept or assume.  Then what else may be favouring the pandemic?

Then the scope reduces to two possibilities viz., susceptibility factor of some people and the initial viral load that enters the host. 

If the host susceptibility is the key preponderant factor means, then the susceptible people are equally susceptible to many other pathogens as well.  Therefore attaching too much of importance and glorification of novel coronavirus or imposing severe lockdown and other norms are not going to prevent the viral spread.  Susceptibility although can be linked to certain age but it is not necessary precursor that young age group are always resistant to infection. 

If we consider the initial viral load as the real culprit of full blown COVID 19 means, then we should question whether the virus is a pathogen or an opportunistic scavenger, can take advantage only when the immune defence mechanism of the host is severely compromised or suppressed. 

Then why the world must give undue importance to the opportunistic pathogen – novel coronavirus when we are already surrounded by several other opportunistic pathogens and are known to cause deadly infection and even death in those immune compromised host. 

Modi government has done too much for too little reward or benefit. 

More than the viral pandemic, Modi has caused loss of livelihood pandemic in India and the victims of such brutality of Modi government out numbers the corona infected population plus those who died due to COVID 19.  

   

Instead of seeking participation of people through creating awareness and understanding, the scientific community or the so called cohort of domain experts in epidemiology, medicine and virology have caused severe confusion and started to air out all sporadic observations and other trivial details out of COVID 19 patients like how children would compete to fly their kites as high as possible. 

People were left with no choice by Modi.  The choices given were either die due to loss of livelihood or die due to novel coronavirus. 

Majority of people might have chosen the virus because they trusted own immunity than the virulence of the virus.  They are the population the novel coronavirus could not even touch and hence the vast majority of people turned negative for the virus by RT PCR despite they are living and moving around in the same population where many people are positive for the virus.

We must make a strong comparison between the total positive cases with the total population because the virus is quite contagious.  Only when we make such comparison, we can extrude the fact that why the vast majority people in all most all countries has not even contracted the virus. 

The virus has to be ubiquitous, but only the susceptible ones are responding to the virus.  If the above hypothesis is true (has to be true) do we have any substantive scientific reason to worry about the pandemic?  Did we not rush to impose lockdown?

Have we not overdone and taken many measures in excess to prevent the pandemic?  What have we achieved by locking down the country? 

The ignorance of the scientific world about the virus should not be allowed to destroy the world worse than the virus?   Precaution and preparedness are necessary but can we let our economy to evaporate consciously because we want to save lives.  Is the novel coronavirus really that deadly? 

The evolution of any species is not limited just to the given space-time dynamic but indeed it includes all future needs and requirements of the species as well.  

From that sense we can easily affirm that man has evolved with immune defence not only against those have already caused infection in him but also those living around him and those new species that are likely to evolve in future. 

Similarly for the new virus also, it is always wise and prudent to go with the susceptible or most vulnerable population than targeting the fittest. 

Like in human population where every child born wants to live long, the virus with very high multiplication rate does not have the necessity that all virion must survive and procreate. 

It like how trees produce large number of flowers and seeds to enhance the survival and formation of a new plant out of at least one seed, novel coronavirus also would have evolved with a clear agreement with the nature that it can enhance its survival only through susceptible and weaker host and not the fittest.    Therefore the rationale and science of lockdown the country and other measures shall only weaken the fittest and not going to protect the susceptible people.  We need to take special measures to protect the susceptible and must let the country to move as usual so that economy and livelihood are protected.

Every individual know their age, various health problems that they suffer, vulnerability and necessity to work barring all the above limitations or challenges.  Therefore creating awareness among people to protect their life without affecting their livelihood would have been the best measure for India. 

But the senseless lockdown and the consequent effect of the lockdown such as loss of livelihood, employment, salary cut etc., only supported the viral pandemic.     

If we had allowed India to remain normal and democratic like before the imposition of lockdown, the virus would have got defeated by the resistant population (who are not positive for the virus).  Those asymptomatic and those with mild symptom also would have made the life of the virus miserable.  Then the struggle of the virus would have been to survive than infect.  But we have messed up everything because it looks like Modi wants to prove he is very decisive and more reachable than the virus. 

Our effort to save people from any deadly diseases should not be uni-focused.  The livelihood of people also must be considered as important as a new pathogen.  For the majority of Indians, financial death is the real death and when one is forced to die financially, he or she may not get scared of novel coronavirus or other deadly pathogen.  Therefore people must be protected economically as well as from the pathogen and only then we can prevent any pandemic.