The argument is based on research that shows that COVID-19 related infections and death rates are much higher among non-White ethnic groups, and are particularly high among Blacks. This could seemingly justify a preferential treatment of one ethnic group over the other until one delves into the reasons and causes for such differences.

According to US and Japanese studies, there are no underlying genetic causes among ethnic groups that would cause one to be more susceptible to infection than another. The seven genes responsible for the viral entry of COVID-19 are equally present and function the same way in all ethnicities. The causes for the disparity have been mostly traced back to other underlying health problems, such as diabetes or obesity, or social factors, such as crammed housing and access to health care. There are currently no studies publicly available comparing adherence to health recommendations such as social distancing, personal hygiene or mask-wearing comparing different communities.

However, views justifying preferential health care for certain ethnic groups on the basis of historical racism and social inequality are rising in prominence. Dayna Bowen Matthew from George Washington University states that “it’s racial inequality — inequality in housing, inequality in employment, inequality in access to health care — that produced the underlying diseases… That’s wrong. And it’s that inequality that requires us to prioritize by race and ethnicity.”

In the US, there is no current legal precedent for a preferential allocation of resources other than the affirmative action known from education. However, in order to bypass possible legal challenges against such a decision, there are reportedly plans to use what is called the Social Vulnerability Index (SVI) that would effectively guide the immunization resources to areas overwhelmingly inhabited by ethnic groups.

In the United Kingdom, the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation stated that immunization should begin with care-home residents and workers, a group that had been hit disproportionately by the virus. The mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, however, had asked the committee to also include ethnicity as a factor.

“I have asked for additional things to be factored in, and that includes concerns I have got around Black, Asian, ethnic minority Londoners who disproportionately suffered during the deaths,” said Khan.

Plans to give preferential treatment to Black and Asian populations, however, seems to have encountered a resistance from the intended beneficiaries both in the UK and the US. According to studies, the largest proportion of those who will choose not to get the vaccine in the UK is among Londoners, and East-Londoners in particular, an area that has one of the highest proportion of Asian and Black inhabitants in the country. In the US, American Public Health Association head Georges Benjamin had stated that “the other challenge you have with saying, ‘We want African Americans to step up first,’ is that we don’t want people to feel that they’re being guinea pigs… We don’t want to give people the perception that they’re being experimented upon.”

If plans for a positive discrimination in health care and crisis management go ahead, this could set a worldwide precedent for racial discrimination not only against majority White social groups across the developed world. The introduction of the principle of historic grievances in the allocation of vital life-saving resources could have unforeseeable consequences for regions where ethnic tensions are rife.