Coronavirus

[ProfessorDavey]

Possibly, but it could still persuade enough people to change, and that overall change would make a difference.

They have painted themselves into a corner entirely of their own making.

Actually the area which is now really concerning me is vaccination.

It has been clear for some time that vaccine efficacy does wane over time, hence the need for boosters. Yet the booster programme seems shambolic and completely lacks transparency - we keep receiving more information about the proportion of the population single and double jabbed, but we also need to see data on the numbers receiving their boosters, which are supposed to be provided 6 months after the second jab. So we should be seeing the same level of vaccination activity right now and over the past month as we saw in March/April as all those people will be ready for boosters.

The other thing which is again, too little too late, is 12-15 year olds. Why did we wait until August to make the decision, only allowing roll out in Sept/Oct what kids were back at school. If we'd made the decision in a timely fashion as other countries did we could have had mass vaccination in mid July (before schools broke up), with kids having built up immunity by the time they returned to school in September. As it is we have a double whammy - so kids only being vaccinated now and also a load of kids unable to be vaccinated as they'd had the virus within the last few weeks.

Yet again, we (or rather the government) have taken their eye off the ball.

[Aruntraveller]

Actually the area which is now really concerning me is vaccination.

It has been clear for some time that vaccine efficacy does wane over time, hence the need for boosters. Yet the booster programme seems shambolic and completely lacks transparency - we keep receiving more information about the proportion of the population single and double jabbed, but we also need to see data on the numbers receiving their boosters, which are supposed to be provided 6 months after the second jab. So we should be seeing the same level of vaccination activity right now and over the past month as we saw in March/April as all those people will be ready for boosters.

The other thing which is again, too little too late, is 12-15 year olds. Why did we wait until August to make the decision, only allowing roll out in Sept/Oct what kids were back at school. If we'd made the decision in a timely fashion as other countries did we could have had mass vaccination in mid July (before schools broke up), with kids having built up immunity by the time they returned to school in September. As it is we have a double whammy - so kids only being vaccinated now and also a load of kids unable to be vaccinated as they'd had the virus within the last few weeks.

Yet again, we (or rather the government) have taken their eye off the ball.

Indeed. I also covered these points in my letter. I'm now 6 months form my last vaccination and not a peep from the NHS. Kwarteng made it sound as if people weren't coming forward to be vaccinated. How can you if you aren't invited and the NHS specifically tells you to wait to hear from them and not to hassle them.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Looking at the BBC news this morning I'm struggling to understand why reintroducing the requirement to use facemasks is such a hot potato: after all, it isn't exact an onerous demand.

Here in Scotland the need to wear them in shops and public transport, and for older kids in secondary school, was never removed - and, anecdotally, compliance with this seems almost universal in my experience.

I think the answer you'll get Gordon is ''It's me english pride, innit''
''I'm a freeee mayn, innit''

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Indeed. I also covered these points in my letter. I'm now 6 months form my last vaccination and not a peep from the NHS. Kwarteng made it sound as if people weren't coming forward to be vaccinated. How can you if you aren't invited and the NHS specifically tells you to wait to hear from them and not to hassle them.

Kwarteng is a completely useless fuck. Co Author of Britain completely unhinged. Copies of which were the solution to the toilet roll crisis.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/oct/19/bolsonaro-coronavirus-brazil-murder-charges-senate-report

Draft report : Ballsupscenario allegedly guilty of crimes against humanity.

[Spud]

Completely scientifically illiterate non-sense.

Firstly that wouldn't prevent the new more transmissible variant from becoming dominant as the whole point is that for any given amount of viral load the more transmissible variant will have a greater propensity to infect and replicate within the cells of the host and be released to infect others. So you might start with equal proportions but once this goes through the next host you will have greater proportions of the new more transmissible variant, and that effect will compound with each infection, replication within a host and release cycle. Hence you get the new strain becoming dominant.

In a person with functioning innate immunity, mutated virus will be eliminated as effectively as original strain. Therefore if transmitted to such a person, there will be less chance that he will pass it on. So the need is for as many people with effective interferon responses etc as possible so that the mutated strains are cleared. Also this can continue as long as the viral load is low, since the innate system can't cope with high loads. So infection prevention measures need to be in place.

But it also fails to recognise that the innate and acquired immune systems go hand in hand - if we become infected both will become involved in the immune response. But of course the innate system alone is simply insufficient to deal with any significant infection event and even with the first exposure to the virus the combination of innate and acquired may be insufficient to prevent severe disease or even death.

As I understand it, the innate immunity of a healthy person can cope with a low viral load and for higher loads will be activated while specific antibodies are  evolving and being produced in great enough quantities to deal with the virus.

The key point about acquired immunity is it makes you much less vulnerable the second (third etc) time you encounter the pathogen.

If the second encounter is with the same pathogen, yes - if the encounter is with a mutated form, it may be less effective.

So we can allow this to happen naturally, and accept major levels of serious disease and death, or we can short circuit the reponse by kick start acquired immunity in a safe manner using the vaccine, so that when that person encounters the actual pathogen the are less infectious and less likely to get serious disease or die.

I know, however, in normal circumstances this is done before exposure to the pathogen, so as to reduce the risk of immune escape which happens when the virus is encountered during a partial immune response such as between first and second doses of vaccine.

[ProfessorDavey]

In a person with functioning innate immunity, mutated virus will be eliminated as effectively as original strain.

But the point is that innate immunity is inefficient at eliminating the virus, hence the need for acquired immunity.

Therefore if transmitted to such a person, there will be less chance that he will pass it on.

He or she - but nonetheless, innate immunity is unlikely to prevent viral replication, expulsion and therefore potential transmissibility in all but the lowest of viral load infections. But the point is that if the virus replicates in the host and is expelled (e.g. through breathing out!!) then the mutant strain is much more likely to infect a new person than the original strain. So the sequence goes as follows:

1. So for one person who becomes infectious having been exposed to both mutant and original strain they may infect four person but only one of those people becomes infected with both strains (call this person a) the other three people (call them people b, c and d) with the new strain only (as it is more transmissible).
2. Those people b, c and d - they infect four additional people all with the mutant strain, while person a infects one person with both strains and three with the mutant strain.

So from a single person infected with both strains we have 16 people infected with the mutant strain and just one infected with the original strain. That is how the mutant becomes dominant.

[ProfessorDavey]

If the second encounter is with the same pathogen, yes - if the encounter is with a mutated form, it may be less effective.

Not necessarily - it depends on the nature of the mutation and the nature of the acquired immunity (whether natural or via vaccine). The reason why the vaccine has targeted the spike protein is because it is key to transmissibility and therefore any mutations that remain viable (i.e. are still able to be transmitted) are likely to retain the spike protein in a broadly similar configuration and so will be similarly recognised by the acquired immunity.

Any mutation which radically changes the configuration of the spike protein will render that protein unable to bind to host cells and cause infection. There have probably been countless mutations of this nature, but we don't know about them because they render the virus non transmissible, or radically less transmissible meaning the mutation disappears in the reverse manner of a more transmissible mutation becoming dominant.

[Nearly Sane]

Morocco suspends flights to UK, Germany, and the Netherlands

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-58981507

[Walt Zingmatilder]

More Tory idiocy

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/oct/22/tory-minister-says-face-masks-should-not-become-a-sign-of-virtue

[Walt Zingmatilder]

And another fucking idiot

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/lifestyle/other/jacob-rees-mogg-roasted-for-suggestion-tories-don-t-need-masks-in-commons-because-they-know-each-other/ar-AAPNqlo?ocid=msedgntp

[Aruntraveller]

Interesting article on the various forces at play on our behaviour during a pandemic:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/oct/22/england-covid-ethics-personal-responsibility

It still raises a very big question in my mind. How in all conscience can any one support this bunch of idiots who are at the very least guilty of manslaughter. Or perhaps more accurately culpable homicide, which Scotland does have as a judgement I believe.

[jeremyp]

This is the worst I've ever seen this map. I think it might be time to do something...

[Spud]

But the point is that innate immunity is inefficient at eliminating the virus, hence the need for acquired immunity.
He or she - but nonetheless, innate immunity is unlikely to prevent viral replication, expulsion and therefore potential transmissibility in all but the lowest of viral load infections. But the point is that if the virus replicates in the host and is expelled (e.g. through breathing out!!) then the mutant strain is much more likely to infect a new person than the original strain. So the sequence goes as follows:

1. So for one person who becomes infectious having been exposed to both mutant and original strain they may infect four person but only one of those people becomes infected with both strains (call this person a) the other three people (call them people b, c and d) with the new strain only (as it is more transmissible).
2. Those people b, c and d - they infect four additional people all with the mutant strain, while person a infects one person with both strains and three with the mutant strain.

So from a single person infected with both strains we have 16 people infected with the mutant strain and just one infected with the original strain. That is how the mutant becomes dominant.

I agree with this (except that early in the pandemic the innate immunity of children was able to cope with the virus - perhaps not preventing transmission though), but if we consider the Wuhan lockdown, it's interesting that they managed to prevent the virus spreading beyond the city except to other countries where there was no lockdown.

If stringent infection prevention measures are adhered to, the infection rate could be kept low enough to suppress more infectious variants. GVB's argument is that if vaccination levels get too high, more people will have what he calls sub-optimal antibodies which fitter variants will be able to evade. This counterbalances the effect of infection prevention measures and they will be more likely to become dominant.

[Maeght]

I agree with this (except that early in the pandemic the innate immunity of children was able to cope with the virus - perhaps not preventing transmission though), but if we consider the Wuhan lockdown, it's interesting that they managed to prevent the virus spreading beyond the city except to other countries where there was no lockdown.

If stringent infection prevention measures are adhered to, the infection rate could be kept low enough to suppress more infectious variants. GVB's argument is that if vaccination levels get too high, more people will have what he calls sub-optimal antibodies which fitter variants will be able to evade. This counterbalances the effect of infection prevention measures and they will be more likely to become dominant.

The original Wuhan variant was much less transmissible than Delta of course and measures which worked for Alpha don't seem to work for Delta. One difference has been the spread in households where isolation was fairly effective with the earlier variants but not so for Delta.

https://time.com/6097341/china-delta-covid19-fujian/

[Udayana]

...
If stringent infection prevention measures are adhered to, the infection rate could be kept low enough to suppress more infectious variants. GVB's argument is that if vaccination levels get too high, more people will have what he calls sub-optimal antibodies which fitter variants will be able to evade. This counterbalances the effect of infection prevention measures and they will be more likely to become dominant.

If GVB wants to use quarantines/lockdowns to contain the virus rather than vaccines, it is theoretically possible but:

1) No governments will continue such controls for the length of time needed
2) It is much too late and virus can now be considered endemic world wide. 

[Udayana]

The original Wuhan variant was much less transmissible than Delta of course and measures which worked for Alpha don't seem to work for Delta. One difference has been the spread in households where isolation was fairly effective with the earlier variants but not so for Delta.

https://time.com/6097341/china-delta-covid19-fujian/

That is because for a given viral load the chances of becoming infected with delta are far higher, by 4 to 5 times, than with alpha

Also, AIU, the vaccine induced antibodies are just as effective against both variants in terms of the proportion of virus particles eliminated but are less effective at preventing infection just because the delta variant is better at breaking into host cells. Both variants carry the spike proteins for which the vaccines have been designed.

There was an article in Nature that described the changes carried by delta and why they work better, but don't have the ref. to hand.
   

[Spud]

If GVB wants to use quarantines/lockdowns to contain the virus rather than vaccines, it is theoretically possible but:

1) No governments will continue such controls for the length of time needed
2) It is much too late and virus can now be considered endemic world wide.

China has used lockdowns and quarantines to successfully control the virus. But they have also vaccinated a billion, apparently without the effects predicted by GVB?

[Spud]

That is because for a given viral load the chances of becoming infected with delta are far higher, by 4 to 5 times, than with alpha

Also, AIU, the vaccine induced antibodies are just as effective against both variants in terms of the proportion of virus particles eliminated but are less effective at preventing infection just because the delta variant is better at breaking into host cells. Both variants carry the spike proteins for which the vaccines have been designed.

There was an article in Nature that described the changes carried by delta and why they work better, but don't have the ref. to hand.
   

That makes sense: so they select for more infectious virus, while preventing serious disease. Do you know whether antibodies from natural (symptomatic) infection are better at preventing infection? Also do you know if the interferon response is better (is the virus less able to disrupt it) after vaccination?

[Aruntraveller]

Nation wearily prepares for lockdown as the government categorically rules it out. (Newsthump)

[Maeght]

That is because for a given viral load the chances of becoming infected with delta are far higher, by 4 to 5 times, than with alpha

Also, AIU, the vaccine induced antibodies are just as effective against both variants in terms of the proportion of virus particles eliminated but are less effective at preventing infection just because the delta variant is better at breaking into host cells. Both variants carry the spike proteins for which the vaccines have been designed.

There was an article in Nature that described the changes carried by delta and why they work better, but don't have the ref. to hand.
   

Yes indeed. I was just attempting to point out that suggesting quarantine and lockdowns as China did initially could control the spread of Delta might not be effective.

[Udayana]

That makes sense: so they select for more infectious virus, while preventing serious disease.

No, they don't select for "more infectious virus". As you agreed earlier, the delta variant will be "dominant" in all cases. The proportion of delta cases to alpha is not changed by vaccination.

Do you know whether antibodies from natural (symptomatic) infection are better at preventing infection?

Not sure what you mean here - preventing infection of the host or passing on the infection. But this sounds like one of GVB's un-evidenced claims. It is not only the possibility of occurrence that needs to considered but the probabilities and resulting statistics.

Also do you know if the interferon response is better (is the virus less able to disrupt it) after vaccination?

I don't know, but you could try: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41577-021-00526-x
 

[ekim]

Nation wearily prepares for lockdown as the government categorically rules it out. (Newsthump)

Whatever went wrong?  ............... https://film.britishcouncil.org/resources/film-archive/health-of-a-nation

[Nearly Sane]

Masks compulsory for everyone in House of Commons except MPs.


https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/oct/26/masks-to-be-mandatory-again-for-parliamentary-staff-but-not-mps-covid?utm_term=Autofeed&CMP=twt_gu&utm_medium&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1635276318

[Aruntraveller]

So went for our Booster vaccination today, but had to drive over to Chichester (20 miles) to get it as everywhere in our immediate vicinity is completely booked up.

So when we got to the vaccination centre there were at least a dozen security guards there. When I enquired why I was told it was due to anti-vaxxers (or twats as I like to call them) having targeted the centre a week or so ago. So not only do we have the huge cost of the vaccination programme we now have to pay for security on top of that.

What a fucking country.

PS Got the boosters.