The Europeans didn't even bring hanta virus with them ~ it was indigenous and is still a risk to everybody living in the Western hemisphere.
The primary reason Europeans purchased slaves from Africans was to REPOPULATE the agricultural regions in South and Central America as rapidly as possible to create wealth.
Those regions were not pristine jungle that'd never known the plough. Most of it had been good farmland and it was returned to that purpose through the hard work of African people who could resist the heat, humidity and to some degree the diseases (e.g. malaria).
BTW, that's just the most recent European migration. The people who became the Sa'ami and the Berbers in the old world were migrating to North America as early as 17,000 years ago when there were still vast Ice sheets over the continent and the ocean was hundreds of feet lower. They created the Clovis culture.
Now, in India, the Indo-European invaders arrived much earlier than is generally thought ~ and became part of the founding population, not just an add on. That's why it's so difficult to identify the Persian invaders of the Vedic period ~ they were simply the same folks as an earlier group.
Berbers are Indo-MiddleEasterns who moved to North Africa not North America. Their movement happened only a few thousand years ago not 17,000. Your fact are totally off the wall. Beside you are only muddying the water with unrelated topics.
My point was the genetic evidence run contrary to the “invasion” theory. It totally lacks all the tell tell signatures of an “invasion”. Invaders usually stamp out the native genetic lineage and language, both of which survives in the northern Indian mainland.