Just a few days ago, on May 16, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo, in addressing the public during one of his media briefings about the coronavirus in his state, actually supported the concept of natural immunity to fight the current pandemic.
Among his statements, Gov. Cuomo admitted that he had developed a theory, but it turned out to be " . . . exactly wrong. The infection rate among essential workers is lower than the general population, and those new cases are coming predominantly from people who are not working and they are at home."
The governor’s admission is wonderful testimony of the success of natural immunity in fighting this virus also known as COVID-19.
In essence, Gov. Cuomo has come to the realization that people who go to work, leaving their homes and isolation, and getting exposed to the virus have less of a tendency to get sick from coronavirus, compared to those in lockdown.
This is the essence of natural immunity.
Its validity is reliably supported by both obsevation — and facts.
The science of immunology tells us that gradual exposure to viruses and other organisms is vital to developing natural immunity — the human body cannot fend off harmful organisms to which it has not been exposed.
Watching closely the Swedish approach to COVID-19 reveals rather than imposing severe restrictions on the normal mobility of its citizens, the government courageously resisted that impulse. Thus, the Swedish government allowed natural immunity to develop among the population. Such a policy is now considered a role model for other countries to follow. A recent article in Foreign Affairs magazine has indicated as much.
For example, Belarus which has even much less restrictive approach then Sweden, has achieved positive results in their fight against COVID-19 as well.
Furthermore, Cuomo’s statement that people who stay at home are more likely to become infected fits comfortably with the recent discovery announced by William Bryan, science and technology adviser to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), that exposure to sunlight, heat and humidity destroys the virus.
There are two other, vital implications found in the governor’s statement.
First, if people worry that reopening the country will bring on another, possibly more deadly wave, then they must provide evidence that staying at home will prevent the second wave of the virus.
The probabilities are that further isolation will actually increase the number of COVID-19 cases. While this might sound counterintuitive, we are more likely to experience a deadly second wave by continuing the stay-at-home approach.
Second, if staying at home increases the possibility of getting COVID-19, then it's fair, logical, and reasonable to say that extending that approach will likely kill more people.
Therefore, it could be argued that forcing people to continue to stay at home — as some governors are insisting — constitutes negligence at best and criminality at worst because it will needlessly result in higher death rates.
Based upon the preceding, I consider the stay-at-home approach one of the most damaging, unscientific, and unfounded public-policy decisions in human history.
I would like to thank Governor Cuomo for his honesty in addressing this issue and speaking the truth.
His observation becomes not only a model of honesty about the topic but a matter supported by science and evidence.
Dr. Tawfik Hamid (aka Tarek Abdelhamid) M.D.; Mlitt (Edu) has testified before Congress and before the European Parliament. Dr. Hamid is the author of "Inside Jihad: How Radical Islam Works, Why It Should Terrify Us, How to Defeat It." Read Dr. Tawfik Hamid's Reports — More Here.
© 2021 Newsmax. All rights reserved.