Covid 2.0

[Chedney Honks]

I want that gig.

I got a real flair for a bon mot and an ass that just won't quit sitting down.

[BlodwynPig]

I want that gig.

I got a real flair for a bon mot and an ass that just won't quit sitting down.

CV via PM

[steveh]

Mmm. I guess the "coronaviruses are a big old mess and don't mutate very much" hadn't necessarily counted on the huge reservoirs we were building up just in time for large parts of the population to have anitbodies and for the vaccines...

Indeed. Which is worrying for a future pandemic that involves a virus that mutates considerably faster if the world doesn't handle it better with non-pharmaceutical interventions than it did this time.

Not seen anything yet to back up the claim of the 60-70% increase in transmission rate with this variant, but even so we're going to need more people vaccinated to hit herd immunity.

As always, thank you Steve. We need you on comms - reach out in PM if you fancy doing some good work for big gov.

This is only a side interest really, but following the topic has made me wish for better science reporting in British newspapers.

[Uncle TechTip]

CV via PM

It's a bit depressing that government are recruiting key members of their communications team through a comedy message board.

[Zetetic]

Not seen anything yet to back up the claim of the 60-70% increase in transmission rate with this variant

The extent to which it (or at least variants with a substantially divergent S gene) is fairly suddenly appearing amongst positive tests is quite something, and plausibly speaks to higher transmissibility (here-and-now)?

(Searching for an extremely optimistic interpretation - I guess if it was less likely to produce asymptomatic cases, that might also produce a similar effect? I wonder if routine asymptomatic screening results are showing the same sort of effect...)

[steveh]

The extent to which it (or at least variants with a substantially divergent S gene) is fairly suddenly appearing amongst positive tests is quite something, and plausibly speaks to higher transmissibility (here-and-now)?

The higher transmissibility seems pretty solid, but there hasn't been an explanation for how they got the 60-70% number.

[Cuellar]

Did anyone notice both Valance and Whitty accidentally say "the new virus... I mean variant".
Could have been the pressure of the most intense press conference of the pandemic so far I suppose.

They were passing each other some strange looks behind the PM's back too.

Yeah it's definitely turned into flying aids

[BlodwynPig]

It's a bit depressing that government are recruiting key members of their communications team through a comedy message board.

CV in PM, please

[BlodwynPig]

The extent to which it (or at least variants with a substantially divergent S gene) is fairly suddenly appearing amongst positive tests is quite something, and plausibly speaks to higher transmissibility (here-and-now)?

(Searching for an extremely optimistic interpretation - I guess if it was less likely to produce asymptomatic cases, that might also produce a similar effect? I wonder if routine asymptomatic screening results are showing the same sort of effect...)

its age dependent, but there are shifts in asymp - symp ratios if I remember the figures correctly.

[Alberon]

It's a bit depressing that government are recruiting key members of their communications team through a comedy message board.

Though, it is a step-up from the random flailing about they've been doing for the last nine months.

[Cuellar]

At least it would widen the pool beyond close friends of the cabinet.

[Zetetic]

NERVTAG minutes:
https://khub.net/documents/135939561/338928724/SARS-CoV-2+variant+under+investigation%2C+meeting+minutes.pdf/962e866b-161f-2fd5-1030-32b6ab467896?t=1608470511452

[Chedney Honks]

 Cheers, Blod. Great to be on board. Will update in due course.

[Zetetic]

Suspect that the "geographic extent" claim was extremely optimistic by the 18th, tbh, based on what we were seeing by the end of the day.

The suggestion that LFDs might be even more fucked with this variant is not encouraging (although this is only weakly hinted at).

[steveh]

NERVTAG minutes:

Ta - so we get a little bit more on those numbers:

* Growth rate from genomic data:which suggest a growth rate of VUI-202012/01 that that is 71% (95%CI: 67%-75%) higher than other variants.

* Studies  of  correlation  between  R-values  and detection  of  the  variant: which suggest an absolute increase in the R-value of between 0.39 to 0.93.

Saw it being reported that it was only in the last two weeks that the numbers of the variant went from the low tens to the mid hundreds, although it wasn't being tested for before so earlier cases were only retrospectively located.

[Zetetic]

Assuming that you've got the target-gene-level PCR cycle data, you should be able to guess at prevalence retrospectively - as far as I know.[nb]I'd assume all the labs have this, but not every lab in the UK Gov testing network flows this level of info through to NHS Digital, which would make some UK-wide analysis a lot easier.[/nb]

(You might not be able to reliably locate individual cases, because not every positive will have sufficient viral load to trigger all of the targets reliably? Maybe? Very ignorant of all this stuff.)

What I've seen also suggests that we've seen a real movement in the last two weeks. I wonder if we'll (retrospectively) also find a lot more of it in areas that generally/otherwise seemed to have lower transmission.

[BlodwynPig]

NERVTAG minutes:
https://khub.net/documents/135939561/338928724/SARS-CoV-2+variant+under+investigation%2C+meeting+minutes.pdf/962e866b-161f-2fd5-1030-32b6ab467896?t=1608470511452

is this a leak? good info though.

[bomb_dog]

Insufficient data to draw conclusions on 'Four probable reinfections have been identified amongst 915 subjects with this variant but further work is needed to compare this reinfection rate with comparable data sets'

Let's hope that these reinfections are an anomaly disproved in the coming week.

[Zetetic]

is this a leak?

^{^ Excellent diversionary OPSEC}

No, I think it's an official release. Wouldn't escape FOI anyway.

[steveh]

Good piece on the variant aimed at a general science audience rather than experts: https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/12/mutant-coronavirus-united-kingdom-sets-alarms-its-importance-remains-unclear

Draws a comparison with a Spanish variant that looked like it had increased transmissibility but turned out to just be in the right place at the right time with the right circumstances. There are two genetic changes linked to increased transmissibility but also one identified in previous studies as likely to reduce its ability to spread. So expect that 70% number to change as the data settles down. However, the similar South African variant also seems to be spreading faster and there is anecdotal evidence of it increasing the severity in younger people.

[sirhenry]

Our world-eating response...

[spaghetamine]

I mean honestly the old covid was fine, why do they have to keep mucking about with it?

[Chedney Honks]

We're all gonna die

(eventually)

[shiftwork2]

It's pretty limp.  The one in Contagion knocked it out of the park by increasing R from 2 to 4.

Good narrative device though for increasing tension and anxiety just when you thought it was the beginning of the end.  And it worked well in the film too!

[DistressedArea]

What does it mean for transmissibility to be 70% greater?

That a probability per unit time or something?

[MrMrs]

bloody hell

[bgmnts]

It's pretty limp.  The one in Contagion knocked it out of the park by increasing R from 2 to 4.

Good narrative device though for increasing tension and anxiety just when you thought it was the beginning of the end.  And it worked well in the film too!

I assume a faster spreading virus means even more sick people which in turn means more strain on the already wrecked NHS, which means more people dying.

[Bence Fekete]

Novara tonight war-gaming a scenario where now because transmissions are so off-scale and extra infectious even a full lockdown won't ever reduce R number below 1 and by February we're just sealed off and incinerated for the good of the world.

Merry Christmas everybody.

[DistressedArea]

Old COVIDS was 5, this one is an 8! For comparison, that's the same as treading on a plug TWICE.

[olliebean]

What does it mean for transmissibility to be 70% greater?

That a probability per unit time or something?

I believe it means a 70% boost to the R number we keep hearing about, which means not even a full lockdown with schools closed such as we had in the spring will be enough to get it below 1, and continuing exponential growth is pretty much assured until enough people get vaccinated. I presume it also means the requirements for herd immunity are now somewhat higher than the 60% that was previously bandied around, so more people will need to be vaccinated before it comes under control.