SARS CoV-2 coronavirus / Covid-19 (No tin foil hat silliness please)

[Beans]

From Newsweek:

"In the WIV's grant applications and awards, The Seeker found detailed descriptions of the Institute's research plans, and they were damning: Projects were underway to test the infectivity of novel SARS-like viruses they'd discovered in human cells and in lab animals, to see how they might mutate as they crossed species, and to genetically recombine pieces of different viruses—all being done at woefully inadequate biosecurity levels. All the elements for a disaster were on hand. Of course, that is not proof that a disaster took place. Barring unlikely eyewitness testimony, we may never have that. But all the evidence DRASTIC has produced points in the same direction: The Wuhan Institute of Virology had spent years collecting dangerous coronaviruses, some of which it has never revealed to the world. It was actively testing these viruses to determine their ability to infect people, as well as what mutations might be necessary to enhance that ability—likely with the ultimate goal of producing a vaccine that would protect against all of them. And the ongoing effort to cover this up implies that something may have gone wrong."

"On nearly the same day, The Seeker struck again. Visiting a database hosted by China's Ministry of Science and Technology, he searched for all theses supervised by Shi Zhengli. Boom. Three hits. "I got it on my first try," he says. "Not sure why no one else thought of this before, but I guess no one was looking." If there had been any remaining doubt about the WIV's pattern of deception, these new theses put it to rest. They indicated that the WIV researchers had never believed a fungus had killed the Mojiang miners, contradicting Shi's remarks in Scientific American and elsewhere. In fact, WIV researchers had been so concerned about a new SARS-like outbreak that they'd tested the blood of neighboring villagers for other cases. And they had known the genetic sequences for the eight other SARS-like viruses from the mine—which could have helped researchers to understand more about SARS-CoV-2 in the early days —long before the pandemic started, and had kept the information to themselves, until DRASTIC called them out."

https://www.newsweek.com/exclusive-...oke-wuhan-lab-story-embarrassed-media-1596958

 

[Pogue Mahone]

Based on that data, you're concluding that on 7 people having being hospitalised that have had both doses (i.e. an inpatient admission)? It's a very, very low percentage.

267 cases after getting both doses of the vaccine. Of those, 10 were admitted to hospital. 2 (already) dead. When you’re talking about the sort of numbers potentially exposed in a significant surge those are not “very, very low percentages”

The fact it’s “only” 267 cases shows how effective two doses are at protecting you but it’s wrong to imply you can’t end up very sick after getting two doses (and the big concern, obviously, is the much lower protection from a single dose)

 

[acnumber9]

267 cases after getting both doses of the vaccine. Of those, 10 were admitted to hospital. 2 (already) dead. When you’re talking about the sort of numbers potentially exposed in a significant surge those are not “very, very low percentages”

The fact it’s “only” 267 cases shows how effective two doses are at protecting you but it’s wrong to imply you can’t end up very sick after getting two doses (and the big concern, obviously, is the much lower protection from a single dose)

10 out of 267 is a very low percentage though. The number of cases won’t change the percentage if that’s how effective two doses is. I get the point you’re trying to make though. Even at very low percentages, cases can still be high.

From that data it’s actually a lower percentage post 1 dose. Which is probably more reflective of the age group of people on one dose versus two.

 

[F-Red]

267 cases after getting both doses of the vaccine. Of those, 10 were admitted to hospital. 2 (already) dead. When you’re talking about the sort of numbers potentially exposed in a significant surge those are not “very, very low percentages”

The fact it’s “only” 267 cases shows how effective two doses are at protecting you but it’s wrong to imply you can’t end up very sick after getting two doses (and the big concern, obviously, is the much lower protection from a single dose)

OK, you're moving the discussion point a bit differently from what your original point was about, hospitalisation.

People who have had both vaccine doses have already been hospitalised by this variant. That number will obviously get higher and higher if the case numbers continue to increase.

Based on those data sets, 267 is 2.83% of the total cases. The hospitalisation rate of those with both doses is 0.07% of the total cases, and doesn't provide context of the people on those second doses (are they in a risk category? how long did they have their second dose? age? etc). It's very, very low. No one is implying that you can't get very sick, but certainly there isn't a need for anyone to get to the level of panic that they were at with the second wave.

Even if you extrapolate that rate to the height of the second peak, where there was nearly 60,000 cases per day on average, you're looking at inpatient hospitalisation rates of 42 per day.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

10 out of 267 is a very low percentage though. The number of cases won’t change the percentage if that’s how effective two doses is. I get the point you’re trying to make though. Even at very low percentages, cases can still be high.

From that data it’s actually a lower percentage post 1 dose. Which is probably more reflective of the age group of people on one dose versus two.

Yeah, excellent point. It would be interesting to know the ages of the vaccinated cases. The fact they’ve had both doses makes it more likely they’re elderly, where the chance of ending up in hospital is much higher to begin with.

I don’t want to get too negative here anyway. I just think it’s risky to ignore the way this vaccine seems to tick all the boxes needed to move the goalposts set when reopening was first planned (more transmissible, more severe illness and vaccines less effective)

 

[Pogue Mahone]

OK, you're moving the discussion point a bit differently from what your original point was about, hospitalisation.



Based on those data sets, 267 is 2.83% of the total cases. The hospitalisation rate of those with both doses is 0.07% of the total cases, and doesn't provide context of the people on those second doses (are they in a risk category? how long did they have their second dose? age? etc). It's very, very low. No one is implying that you can't get very sick, but certainly there isn't a need for anyone to get to the level of panic that they were at with the second wave.

Even if you extrapolate that rate to the height of the second peak, where there was nearly 60,000 cases per day on average, you're looking at inpatient hospitalisation rates of 42 per day.

If everyone had got two doses then this variant is basically a non-event. I only went down a tangent about them not being 100% protected because that’s just not the case. Obviously the far bigger concern are the millions of people not yet fully vaccinated, or not yet vaccinated at all.

 

[acnumber9]

Yeah, excellent point. It would be interesting to know the ages of the vaccinated cases. The fact they’ve had both doses makes it more likely they’re elderly, where the chance of ending up in hospital is much higher to begin with.

I don’t want to get too negative here anyway. I just think it’s risky to ignore the way this vaccine seems to tick all the boxes needed to move the goalposts set when reopening was first planned (more transmissible, more severe illness and vaccines less effective)

I think we’re all just nervous. Some people deal with it by preparing for worst case and some want to pretend everything will be fine. I probably flip between both.

 

[Dumbstar]

I feel a lot more positive now. Thanks knowledgeable folk. Got my second dose on Thursday and it can't come quick enough.

 

[Gehrman]

From Newsweek:

"In the WIV's grant applications and awards, The Seeker found detailed descriptions of the Institute's research plans, and they were damning: Projects were underway to test the infectivity of novel SARS-like viruses they'd discovered in human cells and in lab animals, to see how they might mutate as they crossed species, and to genetically recombine pieces of different viruses—all being done at woefully inadequate biosecurity levels. All the elements for a disaster were on hand. Of course, that is not proof that a disaster took place. Barring unlikely eyewitness testimony, we may never have that. But all the evidence DRASTIC has produced points in the same direction: The Wuhan Institute of Virology had spent years collecting dangerous coronaviruses, some of which it has never revealed to the world. It was actively testing these viruses to determine their ability to infect people, as well as what mutations might be necessary to enhance that ability—likely with the ultimate goal of producing a vaccine that would protect against all of them. And the ongoing effort to cover this up implies that something may have gone wrong."

"On nearly the same day, The Seeker struck again. Visiting a database hosted by China's Ministry of Science and Technology, he searched for all theses supervised by Shi Zhengli. Boom. Three hits. "I got it on my first try," he says. "Not sure why no one else thought of this before, but I guess no one was looking." If there had been any remaining doubt about the WIV's pattern of deception, these new theses put it to rest. They indicated that the WIV researchers had never believed a fungus had killed the Mojiang miners, contradicting Shi's remarks in Scientific American and elsewhere. In fact, WIV researchers had been so concerned about a new SARS-like outbreak that they'd tested the blood of neighboring villagers for other cases. And they had known the genetic sequences for the eight other SARS-like viruses from the mine—which could have helped researchers to understand more about SARS-CoV-2 in the early days —long before the pandemic started, and had kept the information to themselves, until DRASTIC called them out."

https://www.newsweek.com/exclusive-...oke-wuhan-lab-story-embarrassed-media-1596958

I kind of feel that if this hypothesis is real, the CCP will have destroyed whatever evidence remains by now and made sure that no one from the lab will ever speak out about it, so it's never going to get proven no matter how many investigations there may be into the lab from the outside. So it's just going to remain there as a possiblity untill a natural emergence has been proven which also might never happen.

 

[FootballHQ]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

Shit getting real with this poxy Indian variant. More transmissible, resistant to vaccines (especially after single dose) and as of today we know it’s twice as likely to put you in hospital. In the context of rising cases and increasing numbers in hospital. Looking more and more as though pressing on with full re-opening on the 12th is the exact opposite of the “data not dates” promises made a while back.

How quickly could the vaccines be tweaked to deal with this variant which is sticking around and starting to cause a bit of bother, September?

I'd say if you can get updates ready for then and also starting vaxxing decent amount of 11-18 when they're going back to education that's the one chance to get a reasonably normal winter (albeit with mask wearing) occuring otherwise it will be just a repeat of last winter (hopefully though with far fewer deaths).

Any reason to think the world can get back to Jan 2020.....before January 2022. I very much doubt it. Got my first jab on Wednesday afternoon anyway so nearly time.

 

[Don't Kill Bill]

From Newsweek:

"In the WIV's grant applications and awards, The Seeker found detailed descriptions of the Institute's research plans, and they were damning: Projects were underway to test the infectivity of novel SARS-like viruses they'd discovered in human cells and in lab animals, to see how they might mutate as they crossed species, and to genetically recombine pieces of different viruses—all being done at woefully inadequate biosecurity levels. All the elements for a disaster were on hand. Of course, that is not proof that a disaster took place. Barring unlikely eyewitness testimony, we may never have that. But all the evidence DRASTIC has produced points in the same direction: The Wuhan Institute of Virology had spent years collecting dangerous coronaviruses, some of which it has never revealed to the world. It was actively testing these viruses to determine their ability to infect people, as well as what mutations might be necessary to enhance that ability—likely with the ultimate goal of producing a vaccine that would protect against all of them. And the ongoing effort to cover this up implies that something may have gone wrong."

"On nearly the same day, The Seeker struck again. Visiting a database hosted by China's Ministry of Science and Technology, he searched for all theses supervised by Shi Zhengli. Boom. Three hits. "I got it on my first try," he says. "Not sure why no one else thought of this before, but I guess no one was looking." If there had been any remaining doubt about the WIV's pattern of deception, these new theses put it to rest. They indicated that the WIV researchers had never believed a fungus had killed the Mojiang miners, contradicting Shi's remarks in Scientific American and elsewhere. In fact, WIV researchers had been so concerned about a new SARS-like outbreak that they'd tested the blood of neighboring villagers for other cases. And they had known the genetic sequences for the eight other SARS-like viruses from the mine—which could have helped researchers to understand more about SARS-CoV-2 in the early days —long before the pandemic started, and had kept the information to themselves, until DRASTIC called them out."

https://www.newsweek.com/exclusive-...oke-wuhan-lab-story-embarrassed-media-1596958

How reputable is Newsweek ?

 

[stw2022]

The Times today reports that the number of elderly patients in hospital is continuing to fall and although there is an increase in the number of younger people being admitted they're "less sick" than those admitted during the first two waves.

 

[Beans]

I kind of feel that if this hypothesis is real, the CCP will have destroyed whatever evidence remains by now and made sure that no one from the lab will ever speak out about it, so it's never going to get proven no matter how many investigations there may be into the lab from the outside. So it's just going to remain there as a possiblity untill a natural emergence has been proven which also might never happen.

I agree, yet I’m sure the CCP would share any information that seemed to support the natural evolution theory, and they’re clearly being deceptive, that only supports the idea they don’t have it.

I still think it’s worth looking at all the information and seeing how it fits into both explanations. The more I look into the technical side, it doesn’t well match what you would expect to evolve naturally. There is no natural virus that has jumped species that is more infective in the second host. We should find less infective versions from previous generations, for example.

A tidy pile of this sort of data is pretty impressive to my mind.

 

[stw2022]

Is 40% more transmissible bad but not as bad as feared?

 

[Brwned]

Is 40% more transmissible bad but not as bad as feared?

It’s about the same as the “Kent variant” vs the primary European one, it’s a significant step change. The difference is that we’re in summer where transmission was much lower last year, it’s been discovered when cases where much lower, and protection is much higher.

 

[horsechoker]

It’s about the same as the “Kent variant” vs the primary European one, it’s a significant step change. The difference is that we’re in summer where transmission was much lower last year, it’s been discovered when cases where much lower, and protection is much higher.

It seems like it won't cause a huge wave but these variants need to be nipped in the bud. The UK has allowed two variants to spread through the population and I don't think this is the final variant the world will see.

 

[hmchan]

WHO accused people for stigmatization as they called the previously unnamed virus as "Wuhan virus". Why is it fine to call the variants as "Indian/UK/Kent variants"?

 

[gormless]

WHO accused people for stigmatization as they called the previously unnamed virus as "Wuhan virus". Why is it fine to call the variants as "Indian/UK/Kent variants"?

They literally just announced they’re renaming them after Greek letters this week

 

[Pexbo]

WHO accused people for stigmatization as they called the previously unnamed virus as "Wuhan virus". Why is it fine to call the variants as "Indian/UK/Kent variants"?

It’s not, which is why they have started using green letters

 

[horsechoker]

It’s not, which is why they have started using green letters

Great now colour blind people will be more at risk!

 

[Pexbo]

Great now colour blind people will be more at risk!

Ffs

 

[stw2022]

Can’t we just jazz hands the names of the variants?

 

[VP89]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

Shit getting real with this poxy Indian variant. More transmissible, resistant to vaccines (especially after single dose) and as of today we know it’s twice as likely to put you in hospital. In the context of rising cases and increasing numbers in hospital. Looking more and more as though pressing on with full re-opening on the 12th is the exact opposite of the “data not dates” promises made a while back.

What's the latest view on vaccine efficacy against this variant? I thought it was +80% for Pfizer.

Also do you know how long the vaccines are presumed to last? So many elderly or high risk people will be needing boosters soon.

 

[hmchan]

They literally just announced they’re renaming them after Greek letters this week

Sorry for my ignorance. I just still see many people using the origin as the variant name.

 

[Camilo]

It’s not, which is why they have started using green letters

It's not fine to call something what it is? Excellent. Good work people.

 

[horsechoker]

It's not fine to call something what it is? Excellent. Good work people.

Variants can happen anywhere, there's no point stigmatising a country or place when it's almost random where it pop up. We've seen them emerge on almost every continent except Africa and Oceania.

The place names are just as arbitrary as the Greek letter names so why not just go with the latter so we don't get "kung-flu" and people associating it with Chinese people being disease ridden.

 

[Pexbo]

It's not fine to call something what it is? Excellent. Good work people.

Has anyone got any actual proof of patient 0 for any of these variants yet?

 

[gormless]

Sorry for my ignorance. I just still see many people using the origin as the variant name.

Nah mate, not ignorant, if you don’t see a bit of news, you simply haven’t seen it.

I actually remember when they announced it was gonna be called Covid-19 and everybody was like “no way that catches on.”

 

[jojojo]

What's the latest view on vaccine efficacy against this variant? I thought it was +80% for Pfizer.

Also do you know how long the vaccines are presumed to last? So many elderly or high risk people will be needing boosters soon.

Against the Delta variant - it looks like it's around 30/35% for a single dose (AZ or Pfizer) rising to at least 60% (AZ) or 80%(Pfizer) after two doses. Those are the stats for any symptomatic disease though. The protection against hospitalisation after two doses looks like it's in excess of 90% (AZ or Pfizer) but that estimate relies on some assumptions about the age/hospitalisation profile of unvaccinated people against Delta being similar to the pattern seen against previous versions - we'll know more about that in the next few weeks.

No one knows how long the protection lasts, because we don't know for sure how to track immunity (it's not just about antibody levels). They use regular testing of a group of (mostly) healthcare workers to keep a look out for how the vaccines are holding up over time and between variants. For planning, I believe the NHS are assuming that the older risk groups will need booster vaccines in the autumn.

 

[jojojo]

Variants can happen anywhere, there's no point stigmatising a country or place when it's almost random where it pop up. We've seen them emerge on almost every continent except Africa and Oceania.

The place names are just as arbitrary as the Greek letter names so why not just go with the latter so we don't get "kung-flu" and people associating it with Chinese people being disease ridden.

The Beta variant is the virus formerly known as South African.

 

[Jippy]

They literally just announced they’re renaming them after Greek letters this week

I didn't see that. I thought the Delta variant had been given a hyperlocalised name after some river delta area cos there was now more than one Indian variant

 

[Dante]

The Beta variant is the virus formerly known as South African.

And the Eta variant was traced back to a Nigerian origin.

 

[horsechoker]

The Beta variant is the virus formerly known as South African.

Pathetic Beta South Africa is nothing compared to Alpha UK.

I did forget that though. So just leaves Oceania as the only continent to not produce a variant unless we count North America and Antartica

Come to think of it, how the feck didn't the US produce a notable variant?

 

[Dante]

Pathetic Beta South Africa is nothing compared to Alpha UK.

I did forget that though. So just leaves Oceania as the only continent to not produce a variant unless we count North America and Antartica

Come to think of it, how the feck didn't the US produce a notable variant?

PANGO lineage	WHO label[10]	First outbreak	Designated variant of concern	Earliest sample	Transmissibility
B.1.1.7	Alpha	United Kingdom	18 Dec 2020	7 Feb 2020	+82% (43–130%)
B.1.351	Beta	South Africa	14 Jan 2021	15 Feb 2020	+50% (20–113%)
P.1	Gamma	Brazil	15 Jan 2021	7 Apr 2020	+161% (145–176%)
B.1.1.7 with E484K	—	United Kingdom	5 Feb 2021	17 Dec 2020	Under investigation
B.1.429, B.1.427	Epsilon	United States	17 Mar 2021	11 Apr 2020	+20% (19%–24%)
B.1.617.2	Delta	India	6 May 2021	21 Nov 2020	+115%
B.1.617.1	Kappa	India	—	1 Dec 2020	Under investigation
B.1.525	Eta	Nigeria	—	11 Dec 2020	Under investigation

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Variants_of_SARS-CoV-2

America has Epsilon

 

[jojojo]

A fair bit of discussion going on now on ventilation and indoor covid spread. Partly to look at how to avoid things like school outbreaks and how to avoid super-spreader events going forward.

Carbon Dioxide buildup is often used as a proxy for stale air/poor ventilation in occupied buildings. In turn it seems that might be a useful proxy for airbourne virus spread - if only because it's easy to measure. Some countries are starting to look at mandating businesses to use them and equipping schools to do the same.

Just for background, to give an idea of the practical use:

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

It's not a direct reading of risk, which obviously depends on how many people in the room actually have covid, actual airflow where you're sitting etc - but it's a starting point.

For some places - it'll give news that people don't want to hear. Like their non-opening windows and stuffy windowless conference rooms are a liability unless they upgrade their HVAC system. For other places it'll give them useful guidance on which windows to open. For some of us it will give us a clue if we want to go in that gym, that bar, that office etc.

Belgium is one of the countries introducing their use:

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[Pogue Mahone]

A fair bit of discussion going on now on ventilation and indoor covid spread. Partly to look at how to avoid things like school outbreaks and how to avoid super-spreader events going forward.

Carbon Dioxide buildup is often used as a proxy for stale air/poor ventilation in occupied buildings. In turn it seems that might be a useful proxy for airbourne virus spread - if only because it's easy to measure. Some countries are starting to look at mandating businesses to use them and equipping schools to do the same.

Just for background, to give an idea of the practical use:

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

It's not a direct reading of risk, which obviously depends on how many people in the room actually have covid, actual airflow where you're sitting etc - but it's a starting point.

For some places - it'll give news that people don't want to hear. Like their non-opening windows and stuffy windowless conference rooms are a liability unless they upgrade their HVAC system. For other places it'll give them useful guidance on which windows to open. For some of us it will give us a clue if we want to go in that gym, that bar, that office etc.

Belgium is one of the countries introducing their use:

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

Cool experiment. Hopefully these monitors go into widespread use. Seems like a cheap/easy way to make indoor spaces safer.

 

[sugar_kane]

Based on my very basic reading of UK cases vs. deaths data, I make out that we should be averaging about 30 deaths a day right now but it's closer to a third of that level. Hopefully meaning the vaccine is having a noticeable impact?

All I'm looking at is a 14 day lag between cases and deaths during the last peak, vs this time around (14 days because it seems to always take about 2 weeks before a rise or fall in cases is seen in death figures)

June 6th 7 day average deaths = 9
7 day average cases 14 days ago = 2,531
nearest equivalent 7 day average of cases in Autumn 2020 was 10th September (2,528)
7 day average of deaths 14 days after 10th September = 28

It will be skewed by the fact there are a lot more tests happening than last year, but it was weirdly accurate in Jan-April when I was trying to understand to what extent deaths would decrease over the coming days/weeks based on case rates.

I'm expecting someone much better with this kind of thing than me will soon point out some glaring hole/lack of logic in what I've done, in which case I will happily admit I'm talking rubbish!

 

[jojojo]

Based on my very basic reading of UK cases vs. deaths data, I make out that we should be averaging about 30 deaths a day right now but it's closer to a third of that level. Hopefully meaning the vaccine is having a noticeable impact?

All I'm looking at is a 14 day lag between cases and deaths during the last peak, vs this time around (14 days because it seems to always take about 2 weeks before a rise or fall in cases is seen in death figures)

June 6th 7 day average deaths = 9
7 day average cases 14 days ago = 2,531
nearest equivalent 7 day average of cases in Autumn 2020 was 10th September (2,528)
7 day average of deaths 14 days after 10th September = 28

It will be skewed by the fact there are a lot more tests happening than last year, but it was weirdly accurate in Jan-April when I was trying to understand to what extent deaths would decrease over the coming days/weeks based on case rates.

I'm expecting someone much better with this kind of thing than me will soon point out some glaring hole/lack of logic in what I've done, in which case I will happily admit I'm talking rubbish!

You're right. That's been the good news story in the middle of the rising cases of Delta variant. If you look at the age distributed case heat maps, the cases are much higher in the younger age groups than the older ones and the only real explanation for it is that the over 70s are mostly double vaccinated now.

Historically most of the hospitalisations are in the 60+ group and the deaths are concentrated in the over 70s and those with high risk medical conditions - again almost all have been double vaccinated. That's also how it currently feels to the hospitals - Bolton's cases were mostly of working age adults, and most of those hospitalised were in their 30s/40s.

That said, it looks like right now, roughly 5% of cases are being hospitalised. As the case numbers are rising fast, the risk is that hospitalistions will do the same. Even in terms of stopping hospitals getting overloaded again we're looking at a race between the vaccine and the virus and this variant still has a few weeks head start when it comes to the under 50s.

All the stats people are currently saying that we're right on the "too close to call" line when it comes to what happens next, and which bits of the 21st June reopening can go ahead without causing an exit wave of hospitalisations/deaths that could send us backwards again. Personally I think we'll see some changes - more guests at weddings etc, fewer limits on outdoor activities. Other measures will stay - probably around things like masks, WFH and social distancing at indoor events. But that's just me guessing what they'll do, not what's a good idea to do. Basically we could do with a few more weeks worth of vaccinations.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

This thread is really fascinating (if a little techy for non-scientists) Potentially excellent news too.

tl;dr. There have been variants in the past which took off like delta, only to turn out not to be more transmissible. Why? If enough new cases are seeded in the same region in a short space of time that can give the illusion of the variant being much more transmissible than it really is.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

This tweet (and replies) are similarly reassuring.