23 ms·

London put in emergency lockdown as U.K. fights new strain

213 points by remote_phone 6y ago

orbifold 6y ago
At some point natural selection should run its course. Without countermeasures a virus looses lethality over time, these countermeasures select for virus strains which transmit even under extreme counter measures easily. Basically the opposite of what one would hope for.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- tzs 6y ago
  > Without countermeasures a virus looses lethality over time, these countermeasures select for virus strains which transmit even under extreme counter measures easily. How do you explain smallpox, which has remained highly lethal for a very long time, during much of which we didn't really have countermeasures available?
  - chrisbrandow 6y ago
    The naive explanation is that its mutation rate is low. Also the evolving to be less lethal is very much a shorthand, and my impression is that it is a description made specifically to influenza, though it’s not entirely limited to that virus.
    - orbifold 6y ago
      Yes it was meant as shorthand, also I'm not an expert, but I worry that applying evolutionary pressure on the virus in the way it is done right now might actually produce undesirable results.
  - orbifold 6y ago
    Here is a good summary of what experts (which I am not) think: https://www.asbmb.org/asbmb-today/science/112920/will-the-coronavirus-evolve-to-be-less-deadly https://www.asbmb.org/asbmb-today/science/112920/will-the-co.... Regarding the smallpox virus (as per the article): It is a very durable virus, compared to a flu like virus, that means it will have a different reproductive strategy.
  - throwaway316943 6y ago
    If a virus remains transmissible after its host’s death that reduces the disadvantage of killing the host. It was also highly infectious through shed skin that could be carried long distances without the host.
nousermane 6y ago
https://archive.is/Wfsbz https://archive.is/Wfsbz
nicoburns 6y ago
You know it must be serious because Boris has been extremely resistant to imposing restrictions this entire time, and he knows how much people were looking forward to their Christmas. Apparantly it's around 70% more infectious, although I'm not sure how that's calculated. I guess we all just have to hope this doesn't affect the efficacy of the vaccines. Apparently the spike protein is affected, although it sounds like the changes are relatively small and thus they're hoping it doesn't make any difference.
- callamdelaney 6y ago
  He hasn’t been extremely resistant at all, the facts speak to the exact opposite.
  - mellosouls 6y ago
    I agree; I'm not somebody who would have voted for him, but he's had some really tough decisions to make, and whether or not he's made the right call or dragged his heels at times, he's clearly been prepared to upend his own ideological leanings when needed and I respect him and the government for that.
    - callamdelaney 6y ago
      As a 23 year old I personally cannot wait to pay for it. Nothing makes me happier than a nice big fat tax bill at the end of the year for the rest of my life. Surely, considering the actual lethality of this, a better approach would have been education. Educate people of the risks, let them isolate if they want to, and let everybody else get on with it.
    - matthewmacleod 6y ago
      I am baffled that somebody could observe the actions of the UK government and come to this conclusion. They seem to have been determined to do the worst possible thing to the very last moment, then abruptly about-face when that position was unsustainable.
callamdelaney 6y ago
Lmao
pmoriarty 6y ago
As has been pointed out in an earlier article about the "new strain"[1]: "Let's not be hysterical. It doesn't mean it's more transmissible or more infectious or dangerous." That there are new strains of COVID-19 has been covered over, and over, and over, and over again on the This Week in Virology podcast[2] (which usually has 4 to 6 virologists on it every week discussing COVID-19 news), and they've always had the same message: New strains naturally arise all the time as the virus mutates, but there is no evidence that these mutations make the virus more transmissible or infectious. Nor do they make the illness more severe nor otherwise affect clinical outcomes, nor make treatment any less effective. People just love to talk up the discovery of new strains, thinking that coronavirus mutations are like flu mutations (which actually do require new vaccines every year), but they're not. Coronavirus strains are kept an eye on by scientists for the purpose of tracking the spread and origin of the disease, and there'll always be one strain that will be more common than others, but it doesn't mean it's something we have to fear any more than any other strain. [1] - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-55308211 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-55308211 [2] - https://www.microbe.tv/twiv/ https://www.microbe.tv/twiv/
- chimprich 6y ago
  That's old news, unfortunately. The latest data suggest that it is significantly more transmissible. "Up to" 70% more, according to the UK government's press conference. This is big. Luckily, it doesn't seem to be more dangerous in terms of hospital admissions. Statement from Chris Whitty, UK's chief medical advisor to the government: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/statement-from-chief-medical-officer-professor-chris-whitty-about-new-strain-of-covid-19 https://www.gov.uk/government/news/statement-from-chief-medi...
  - oxfordmale 6y ago
    NERVTAG's early analysis suggests the new variant could increase R by 0.4 or greater. Although there is considerable uncertainty, it may be up to 70% more transmissible than the old variant.
    - deleted 6y ago
factsonly 6y ago
Seems the hospitals are still less busy than last year https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9043583/NHS-data-suggests-hospitals-England-December.html https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9043583/NHS-data-su...
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- thebruce87m 6y ago
  I don’t think you can infer how busy hospital staff are from this article even though hospitals may have fewer patients in them. Not all hospital beds are equal. Can you put a covid patient in a bed next to a covid-free patient? Probably not. How many staff are off ill or self isolating? Can the covid staff treat non-covid patients? If so, is there a PPE robing/disrobing overhead to this?
rwmj 6y ago
British Medical Journal (BMJ) page about the new variant: https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m4857 https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m4857 It has 17 mutated bases (is that a lot? or typical?) Of particular concern is the mutated spike protein which "may, in theory, result in the virus becoming more infectious and spreading more easily between people."
- jpxw 6y ago
  > Mutated spike protein Hm. Let’s hope the vaccine still works.
  - codeulike 6y ago
    They're looking into it. In theory the vaccines should still be ok but we'll know in two weeks or so I think.
  - eternalny1 6y ago
    It seems, so far, the vaccine is still relevant. > Over time, as more mutations occur, the vaccine may need to be altered. This happens with seasonal flu, which mutates every year, and the vaccine is adjusted accordingly. The SARS-CoV-2 virus doesn’t mutate as quickly as the flu virus, and the vaccines that have so far proved effective in trials are types that can easily be tweaked if necessary.
hartator 6y ago
Shouldn’t new strains be more contagious but less deadly?
- Someone1234 6y ago
  Why "should" they be?
  - hartator 6y ago
    By darwinism.
  - eternalban 6y ago
    Natural selection. Deadlier strains reduce life span of hosts that transmit the disease.
    - dvfjsdhgfv 6y ago
      You mean the natural selection of hosts, not viruses. Why should one kind of organism "care" about the natural selection of another?
      - yibg 6y ago
        It’s not about caring but what survives. Viruses variants that regularly kills hosts are less likely to spread than ones that don’t.
      - eternalban 6y ago
        I'm in agreement wtih @yibg. > "You mean the natural selection of hosts, not viruses", No, just simply 'natural selection', as the overall process that determines which entities get to reproduce. Natural selection for the hosts is about their chances for reproducing (before dying from the disease). And in this case, we don't care about that since its a fair assumption that the patient is not having sex in ICU. :) Natural selection for viruses is about having the opportunity to jump hosts and replicate more viruses. The longer the host lives the higher the chances for the virus to propagate.
sideshowb 6y ago
One has to wonder to what extent the new strain is really responsible for this, versus being a convenient excuse for the government's failure to manage the normal variant.
- gnusty_gnurc 6y ago
  This is always said “if only we were more competent/oppressive/empathetic people - we’d have done fine” instead of perhaps wondering whether much of the mitigation efforts and their implementation are a fraught and possibly even net-negative exercise.
  - the8472 6y ago
    We don't need to wonder, we can look at nations that succeeded in controlling the spread from the start and now are reaping the benefits.
    - albertgoeswoof 6y ago
      Without making excuses it is hard to compare though
    - jl6 6y ago
      The data is so noisy though. Earlier in the year you could point to Germany as an example of a nation doing it right - but look at them now.
      - refurb 6y ago
        Indeed. Back in Oct Canada was doing quite well and now they have 25x number of cases in 2 months.
    - gnusty_gnurc 6y ago
      With time the people we vaunted as enlightened don’t appear to be doing well. In fact it seems they’re vulnerable and now subject to the same seasonal trends of spread everyone else was largely powerless against. California, Germany, Korea, Japan... We don’t consider whether the reaction has been worse than the virus, but that’s because there’s so much political reputation, ego, and identity staked on having been “level-headed” about all this.
ta8645 6y ago
Do we have any reason at all to trust that any of the vaccines currently being rolled out deal with this new strain? There was surely no way to include testing for this in any of the trials. Doesn't this at least raise the spectre that the vaccines will all be for not and we'll still be faced with all the same issues that already exist.
- albertgoeswoof 6y ago
  The UK government has stated that there is no evidence the vaccine will not be effective against this strain. And from the bmj: The new variant has mutations to the spike protein that the three leading vaccines are targeting. However, vaccines produce antibodies against many regions in the spike protein, so it’s unlikely that a single change would make the vaccine less effective. Over time, as more mutations occur, the vaccine may need to be altered. This happens with seasonal flu, which mutates every year, and the vaccine is adjusted accordingly. The SARS-CoV-2 virus doesn’t mutate as quickly as the flu virus, and the vaccines that have so far proved effective in trials are types that can easily be tweaked if necessary. Peacock said, “With this variant there is no evidence that it will evade the vaccination or a human immune response. But if there is an instance of vaccine failure or reinfection then that case should be treated as high priority for genetic sequencing.”
  - tux1968 6y ago
    That's not very reassuring, why is the new strain causing any problems at all if it behaves exactly like the existing strain? And if they haven't actually done any trials or testing, then they haven't really looked for any evidence. If they haven't looked for any, it seems rather too convenient to use the lack of evidence as a reason for hope that the current crop of vaccines provides any protection at all.
    - spuz 6y ago
      > why is the new strain causing any problems at all if it behaves exactly like the existing strain? If it's true that the new strain is 70% more transmissible then that means more people will get sick before we can reach immunity thanks to a vaccine, hospitals will be overwhelmed sooner and more people will die.
LatteLazy 6y ago
I live in London. The core issue here is that the government hasn't really taken any action. There are "rules" but they are full of loopholes and totally unenforced. 2 cases in particular stand out to me: Compliance with mask wearing on TFL is less than 50%. "Covid enforcement" officers walk around about one train in 50, and despite it being 8 months since this started, "I don't have one" is an acceptable answer to why you're not wearing a mask. Supermarkets continue to be rammed, but staff aren't required to wear masks. Nor are they enforcing the requirement on customers beyond the door. One staff member with covid will rapidly infect a few 1000 people given how busy they are on a Saturday morning. Wtf aren't staff required to wear masks? The attitude here is rapidly becoming "why should I bother if no one else is?". And frankly, I think the government know and encourage this. Its all but policy. Time and again we see them decline scientific advice, then act surprised when infection rates spike. I'm especially frustrated as my best friend lives in Melbourne. Despite lockdown starting at basically the same time, and some crazy bad luck/incidents, Melbourne is back to BAU.
- dehrmann 6y ago
  Masks might slow it, but they're everywhere in the Bay Area, and cases are rising faster than ever, and we're setting new records for new cases, so "just wear a mask in public" isn't enough.
  - yibg 6y ago
    Isn’t slowing it the whole point, especially now with vaccines in the horizon? Slow it enough so that 1) hospitals aren’t overwhelmed and 2) less people die unnecessarily
    - vmception 6y ago
      the concept of velocity is too hard for people to grasp they need binary good/bad cause/effect edicts, like children. state and municipal governments are poorly catering to their own velocity based directives, and the juvenile more simplistic expectations of their population.
  - 6y ago
leke 6y ago
“When the virus changes its method of attack we must change our method of defense,” What did I miss? How is this mutation attacking differently?
- qz2 6y ago
  Until we actually hear evidence that it is, then it’s not. But we still have to sleep with one eye open.
  - pmg102 6y ago
    He means as it is more transmissible (but yes, apparently by the same routes and mechanisms) we need to tighten restrictions. A rhetorician would call these different "methods" of attack but you're right that in fact they're merely different degrees of the same method.
    - qz2 6y ago
      True and I certainly agree with that side of things.
- eternalny1 6y ago
  It's not. There are genetic changes, including to the spike protein that it uses to attack. > The new variant has mutations to the spike protein that the three leading vaccines are targeting. However, vaccines produce antibodies against many regions in the spike protein, so it’s unlikely that a single change would make the vaccine less effective.
- LatteLazy 6y ago
  That quote comes from Boris, everything he says is nonsense so just ignore it.
codeulike 6y ago
Here's a Twitter feed (a Swiss virologist I think?) with decent info on the new strain. Dr Emma Hodcroft (@firefoxx66): https://twitter.com/firefoxx66/status/1340327606303027201?s=19 https://twitter.com/firefoxx66/status/1340327606303027201?s=...
- raphlinus 6y ago
  I just want to confirm the quality of this source, as someone who is not actually a biologist but who has been following the scene carefully since the beginning. Dr Hodcroft is in the top tier of science communicators. This "new strain" story is basically tailor made for misinformation and poor information, as it has such a strong hook. The tl;dr as I understand it is that there may be something there, but it is too early to tell for sure.
codeulike 6y ago
A lot of you missing the context of what's been going on here in recent days - they've seen an unexpected spike in infections and it seems to correlate with a strain with an unusually high number of mutations. So they're not totally sure the new strain is responsible but it looks serious enough to get extra cautious. By tracking the growth of that strain then reckon it's 70% more easily spread. That could be statistical fluke due to a series of superspreader events or something like that but it seems less likely day by day. See here for strain analysis https://twitter.com/firefoxx66/status/1340327606303027201 https://twitter.com/firefoxx66/status/1340327606303027201
- randomsearch 6y ago
  They’ve seen a spike in infections in a densely populated mega city in the busiest shopping weeks of the year, when (anecdotally) people are not taking precautions and social distancing. In what way is that unexpected?
  - codeulike 6y ago
    True, and that's what I thought a few days ago. But they've also been tracking growth of the new strain at the same time. New strain has been responsible for a growing proportion of positive tests. May be coincidence, but they are being cautious. E.g. see graph here https://twitter.com/The_Soup_Dragon/status/1340349639946629120?s=19 https://twitter.com/The_Soup_Dragon/status/13403496399466291... Edit: complete conjecture but if new strain is more infectious but less dangerous it might actually be helpful in the long run as it might displace other strains. Fingers crossed
  - DanBC 6y ago
    The spike isn't just in London, but across the south east. https://twitter.com/Davewwest/status/1339918672811462657?s=20 https://twitter.com/Davewwest/status/1339918672811462657?s=2... https://twitter.com/avds/status/1340355825471287299?s=20 https://twitter.com/avds/status/1340355825471287299?s=20 https://twitter.com/VictimOfMaths/status/1340010730687492096?s=20 https://twitter.com/VictimOfMaths/status/1340010730687492096... This one shows high rates for Medway: https://twitter.com/RP131/status/1338158031067033601?s=20 https://twitter.com/RP131/status/1338158031067033601?s=20
edh649 6y ago
For those (like me) who are looking for some more details of this new strain, I found 2 papers from the `COVID-19 Genomics Consortium UK (CoG-UK)` of great interest. It seems like the prime reasons for concern are increased frequency of mutations, increased proportion of cases, and possible change in immune response > Several aspects of this cluster are noteworthy for epidemiological and biological reasons and we report preliminary findings below. In summary: The B.1.1.7 lineage accounts for an increasing proportion of cases in parts of England. The number of B.1.1.7 cases, and the number of regions reporting B.1.1.7 infections, are growing. B.1.1.7 has an unusually large number of genetic changes, particularly in the spike protein. Three of these mutations have potential biological effects that have been described previously to varying extents: > - Mutation N501Y is one of six key contact residues within the receptor-binding domain (RBD) and has been identified as increasing binding affinity to human and murine ACE2. > - The spike deletion 69-70del has been described in the context of evasion to the human immune response but has also occurred a number of times in association with other RBD changes. > - Mutation P681H is immediately adjacent to the furin cleavage site, a known location of biological significance. > The rapid growth of this lineage indicates the need for enhanced genomic and epidemiological surveillance worldwide and laboratory investigations of antigenicity and infectivity. https://www.cogconsortium.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Report-1_COG-UK_19-December-2020_SARS-CoV-2-Mutations.pdf https://www.cogconsortium.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Repo... https://virological.org/t/preliminary-genomic-characterisation-of-an-emergent-sars-cov-2-lineage-in-the-uk-defined-by-a-novel-set-of-spike-mutations/563 https://virological.org/t/preliminary-genomic-characterisati...
- asdff 6y ago
  Anecdotally I know a family where every member tested positive for COVID in the spring with severe symptoms at the time. They recovered, then over thanksgiving they started experiencing very mild symptoms (some none at all, others loss of taste and smell to more typical cold like symptoms), and all tested positive once again. It might be that after you contracted COVID once, or a particular strain of COVID once, that you have a heightened immune response and less severe symptoms when you do catch the disease again. It is hard to say for sure what is going on from an isolated case, but this certainly doesn't bode well.
aazaa 6y ago
> “There is no current evidence to suggest the new strain causes a higher mortality rate or that it affects vaccines and treatments, although urgent work is underway to confirm this,” [England’s Chief Medical Officer] Whitty said. That evidence would presumably come in the form of vaccinated patients developing infections from the new strain. Given that both the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines appear to have a window of about one month before full effect, it could be some time before the hypothesis can be tested.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
supernova87a 6y ago
And... countdown to hard Brexit in 12 days too.
DenisM 6y ago
Apropos of other comments. What do we think about the mask “issue”? Some people vehemently refuse to wear them, others take “just go with flow” attitude, yet others approach it with outsized religious zeal, hounding the heretics or at least giving them the stink eye. It also seems some people take great comfort on the mask, wearing it even inside their cars or waaay out in the open. Are we witnessing a religious schism in the making? Is it with us to stay, post-covid?
- addicted 6y ago
  The mask issue is a non issue. There are a few possibilities: 1) Masks work in preventing the spread of the virus. 2) Masks don’t work in preventing the spread of the virus. If we don’t wear masks, then: under (1) we have hundreds of thousands of deaths, millions of sickness instances, and hundreds of billions of lost dollars due to reduced economic activity and sickness, compared to the wearing mask scenario. (2) There’s very little difference. Some may say we unnecessarily spend money on masks, but considering that the making of masks can employ otherwise unused resources, especially in the clothing manufacturing and distribution economy, it may actually be a positive to make and distribute masks even if they don’t work, comparable to a stimulus, but more effective because all of the money is immediately deployed, and not just saved, and there are far fewer ideological issues with giving money away for nothing, and it does not require any deficit spending. Further, even if masks don’t help with COVID, they will help reduce chances of spreading other diseases and therefore reduce the strain on hospitals. Now if you further consider that there is a lot of evidence to indicate that masks do have an effect, and the countries that have handled COVID best by and large swear by them, it’s an absolute no brained to mandate them.
- zepearl 6y ago
  > It also seems some people take great comfort on the mask, wearing it even inside their cars or waaay out in the open. Initially, in March, I had similar thoughts - in my case it's currently like this: - with the temperature being 0-5 Celsius throughout the day the mask keeps my face a bit warmer than when not wearing it. I do like it in this context :) - as I have to get off&on the bus and 2 trains, I just keep it on all the time while commuting. The recommendations are not to touch the mask's external surface (and not to indirectly get in contact with it), keeping it on all the time seems to be the least dangerous option. - wearing glasses while wearing as well a mask can be very challenging (fogging); once I finally manage to make everything work (dozens of tiny adjustments) I "freeze" my setup and keep it like that until I know that I won't need the mask anymore. Therefore, nothing extreme going on if you see me driving or walking alone with the mask on - just being practical :)
matejcs 6y ago
"You can attend places of worship for a service." This is completely unacceptable.
- addicted 6y ago
  It’s unconscionable that someone is allowed to p into a liquor store with a limit on the number of patrons at a time, buy a quick bottle, with minimal human interaction and easily maintained social distancing and be out within minutes, but they are not allowed to enter a building with hundreds of people at the same time, sit for hours, singing and talking to each other. /s
- umanwizard 6y ago
  Not everyone has the same priorities as you, and some might find it completely unacceptable to ban religious services out of fear of a virus. Hard to say who is right or wrong since it's just a function of weighting different values differently.
nojvek 6y ago
In Seattle. I was very impressed once the mask mandate was out how many people complied. Sure there were some people protesting “are you sheep?” but 99% complied. Honestly Costco and Fred Meyers + others really Amped up the game. You can’t enter if you don’t have a mask. Fred Meyers were nice enough to give you a mask if you don’t have one for free. You’d have to really be a rebel not to wear a mask. There are quite a few rebels here and there but strict enforcement by supermarkets really worked. If the police were enforcing this I bet a few African American folks would have been shot over not wearing masks. The cops here just go crazy mode for the smallest thing.
slippers 6y ago
terranform
shadowprofile77 6y ago
Let's summarize some basic realities quickly to give a picture of why lockdown was largely a farce as anything but a short-term harm reduction measure. For those of you here (I assume a slight majority at least) who live in bubbles of white collar work conditions that can easily be done remotely from within highly developed countries with fairly developed social support infrastructure and the means to amp it up for extended periods of time: The vast majority of the rest of the world is not like your bubble. Despite massive improvements in human standards of living during the last several decades, the majority of the world population in the majority of the world's countries lives in such a way that their absolutely essential daily economic needs can only be serviced by daily close interaction with dozens or hundreds of other people in urban situations. For the developing world this is a nearly universal need and even for the developed world, huge parts of the population have to do the same thing and there's simply no way for them to avoid it. Covid will spread among them no matter what kind of extreme measures a small privileged subset of the population smugly pushes for, and from there it will by one means or another filter its way upwards even to those who can indeed isolate without major immediate economic problems. So, unless a small fraction of the world that can entirely work remotely is somehow capable of completely cutting itself away from contact with the rest of the world of people who emphatically can't do this same thing, the pandemic will run its contagious course regardless of the measures taken haphazardly in one jurisdiction or another. This applies at both the global macro scale and the local scale, and unless you want to advocate an absurdly unrealistic level of social atomization continuing indefinitely with complete disregard for very real, very serious economic consequences, it's something that simply won't happen.
animal531 6y ago
It's not just in the UK. The new (currently termed) 501.V2 strain is rampant here in South Africa as well. So far it is spreading really fast, and especially among younger people (with no co-morbidities) who are becoming critically sick. We've had a pretty authoritarian year of lockdowns and tough regulations, so now compliance is way down all over the board. Some parts of the coastline has been totally closed, but since it's now our major vacation people are just swarming malls and other locations. I'm expecting a pretty big outbreak again, possibly either matching or eclipsing our previous growth that we had at the start of June.

213 points by remote_phone 6y ago

At some point natural selection should run its course. Without countermeasures a virus looses lethality over time, these countermeasures select for virus strains which transmit even under extreme counter measures easily. Basically the opposite of what one would hope for.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
tzs 6y ago
> Without countermeasures a virus looses lethality over time, these countermeasures select for virus strains which transmit even under extreme counter measures easily. How do you explain smallpox, which has remained highly lethal for a very long time, during much of which we didn't really have countermeasures available?
- chrisbrandow 6y ago
  The naive explanation is that its mutation rate is low. Also the evolving to be less lethal is very much a shorthand, and my impression is that it is a description made specifically to influenza, though it’s not entirely limited to that virus.
  - orbifold 6y ago
    Yes it was meant as shorthand, also I'm not an expert, but I worry that applying evolutionary pressure on the virus in the way it is done right now might actually produce undesirable results.
- orbifold 6y ago
  Here is a good summary of what experts (which I am not) think: https://www.asbmb.org/asbmb-today/science/112920/will-the-coronavirus-evolve-to-be-less-deadly https://www.asbmb.org/asbmb-today/science/112920/will-the-co.... Regarding the smallpox virus (as per the article): It is a very durable virus, compared to a flu like virus, that means it will have a different reproductive strategy.
- throwaway316943 6y ago
  If a virus remains transmissible after its host’s death that reduces the disadvantage of killing the host. It was also highly infectious through shed skin that could be carried long distances without the host.

nousermane 6y ago

https://archive.is/Wfsbz https://archive.is/Wfsbz

nicoburns 6y ago

You know it must be serious because Boris has been extremely resistant to imposing restrictions this entire time, and he knows how much people were looking forward to their Christmas. Apparantly it's around 70% more infectious, although I'm not sure how that's calculated. I guess we all just have to hope this doesn't affect the efficacy of the vaccines. Apparently the spike protein is affected, although it sounds like the changes are relatively small and thus they're hoping it doesn't make any difference.

callamdelaney 6y ago
He hasn’t been extremely resistant at all, the facts speak to the exact opposite.
- mellosouls 6y ago
  I agree; I'm not somebody who would have voted for him, but he's had some really tough decisions to make, and whether or not he's made the right call or dragged his heels at times, he's clearly been prepared to upend his own ideological leanings when needed and I respect him and the government for that.
  - callamdelaney 6y ago
    As a 23 year old I personally cannot wait to pay for it. Nothing makes me happier than a nice big fat tax bill at the end of the year for the rest of my life. Surely, considering the actual lethality of this, a better approach would have been education. Educate people of the risks, let them isolate if they want to, and let everybody else get on with it.
  - matthewmacleod 6y ago
    I am baffled that somebody could observe the actions of the UK government and come to this conclusion. They seem to have been determined to do the worst possible thing to the very last moment, then abruptly about-face when that position was unsustainable.

callamdelaney 6y ago

Lmao

pmoriarty 6y ago

As has been pointed out in an earlier article about the "new strain"[1]: "Let's not be hysterical. It doesn't mean it's more transmissible or more infectious or dangerous." That there are new strains of COVID-19 has been covered over, and over, and over, and over again on the This Week in Virology podcast[2] (which usually has 4 to 6 virologists on it every week discussing COVID-19 news), and they've always had the same message: New strains naturally arise all the time as the virus mutates, but there is no evidence that these mutations make the virus more transmissible or infectious. Nor do they make the illness more severe nor otherwise affect clinical outcomes, nor make treatment any less effective. People just love to talk up the discovery of new strains, thinking that coronavirus mutations are like flu mutations (which actually do require new vaccines every year), but they're not. Coronavirus strains are kept an eye on by scientists for the purpose of tracking the spread and origin of the disease, and there'll always be one strain that will be more common than others, but it doesn't mean it's something we have to fear any more than any other strain. [1] - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-55308211 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-55308211 [2] - https://www.microbe.tv/twiv/ https://www.microbe.tv/twiv/

chimprich 6y ago
That's old news, unfortunately. The latest data suggest that it is significantly more transmissible. "Up to" 70% more, according to the UK government's press conference. This is big. Luckily, it doesn't seem to be more dangerous in terms of hospital admissions. Statement from Chris Whitty, UK's chief medical advisor to the government: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/statement-from-chief-medical-officer-professor-chris-whitty-about-new-strain-of-covid-19 https://www.gov.uk/government/news/statement-from-chief-medi...
- oxfordmale 6y ago
  NERVTAG's early analysis suggests the new variant could increase R by 0.4 or greater. Although there is considerable uncertainty, it may be up to 70% more transmissible than the old variant.
  - deleted 6y ago

factsonly 6y ago

Seems the hospitals are still less busy than last year https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9043583/NHS-data-suggests-hospitals-England-December.html https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9043583/NHS-data-su...

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
thebruce87m 6y ago
I don’t think you can infer how busy hospital staff are from this article even though hospitals may have fewer patients in them. Not all hospital beds are equal. Can you put a covid patient in a bed next to a covid-free patient? Probably not. How many staff are off ill or self isolating? Can the covid staff treat non-covid patients? If so, is there a PPE robing/disrobing overhead to this?

rwmj 6y ago

British Medical Journal (BMJ) page about the new variant: https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m4857 https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m4857 It has 17 mutated bases (is that a lot? or typical?) Of particular concern is the mutated spike protein which "may, in theory, result in the virus becoming more infectious and spreading more easily between people."

jpxw 6y ago
> Mutated spike protein Hm. Let’s hope the vaccine still works.
- codeulike 6y ago
  They're looking into it. In theory the vaccines should still be ok but we'll know in two weeks or so I think.
- eternalny1 6y ago
  It seems, so far, the vaccine is still relevant. > Over time, as more mutations occur, the vaccine may need to be altered. This happens with seasonal flu, which mutates every year, and the vaccine is adjusted accordingly. The SARS-CoV-2 virus doesn’t mutate as quickly as the flu virus, and the vaccines that have so far proved effective in trials are types that can easily be tweaked if necessary.

hartator 6y ago

Shouldn’t new strains be more contagious but less deadly?

Someone1234 6y ago
Why "should" they be?
- hartator 6y ago
  By darwinism.
- eternalban 6y ago
  Natural selection. Deadlier strains reduce life span of hosts that transmit the disease.
  - dvfjsdhgfv 6y ago
    You mean the natural selection of hosts, not viruses. Why should one kind of organism "care" about the natural selection of another?
    - yibg 6y ago
      It’s not about caring but what survives. Viruses variants that regularly kills hosts are less likely to spread than ones that don’t.
    - eternalban 6y ago
      I'm in agreement wtih @yibg. > "You mean the natural selection of hosts, not viruses", No, just simply 'natural selection', as the overall process that determines which entities get to reproduce. Natural selection for the hosts is about their chances for reproducing (before dying from the disease). And in this case, we don't care about that since its a fair assumption that the patient is not having sex in ICU. :) Natural selection for viruses is about having the opportunity to jump hosts and replicate more viruses. The longer the host lives the higher the chances for the virus to propagate.

sideshowb 6y ago

One has to wonder to what extent the new strain is really responsible for this, versus being a convenient excuse for the government's failure to manage the normal variant.

gnusty_gnurc 6y ago
This is always said “if only we were more competent/oppressive/empathetic people - we’d have done fine” instead of perhaps wondering whether much of the mitigation efforts and their implementation are a fraught and possibly even net-negative exercise.
- the8472 6y ago
  We don't need to wonder, we can look at nations that succeeded in controlling the spread from the start and now are reaping the benefits.
  - albertgoeswoof 6y ago
    Without making excuses it is hard to compare though
  - jl6 6y ago
    The data is so noisy though. Earlier in the year you could point to Germany as an example of a nation doing it right - but look at them now.
    - refurb 6y ago
      Indeed. Back in Oct Canada was doing quite well and now they have 25x number of cases in 2 months.
  - gnusty_gnurc 6y ago
    With time the people we vaunted as enlightened don’t appear to be doing well. In fact it seems they’re vulnerable and now subject to the same seasonal trends of spread everyone else was largely powerless against. California, Germany, Korea, Japan... We don’t consider whether the reaction has been worse than the virus, but that’s because there’s so much political reputation, ego, and identity staked on having been “level-headed” about all this.

ta8645 6y ago

Do we have any reason at all to trust that any of the vaccines currently being rolled out deal with this new strain? There was surely no way to include testing for this in any of the trials. Doesn't this at least raise the spectre that the vaccines will all be for not and we'll still be faced with all the same issues that already exist.

albertgoeswoof 6y ago
The UK government has stated that there is no evidence the vaccine will not be effective against this strain. And from the bmj: The new variant has mutations to the spike protein that the three leading vaccines are targeting. However, vaccines produce antibodies against many regions in the spike protein, so it’s unlikely that a single change would make the vaccine less effective. Over time, as more mutations occur, the vaccine may need to be altered. This happens with seasonal flu, which mutates every year, and the vaccine is adjusted accordingly. The SARS-CoV-2 virus doesn’t mutate as quickly as the flu virus, and the vaccines that have so far proved effective in trials are types that can easily be tweaked if necessary. Peacock said, “With this variant there is no evidence that it will evade the vaccination or a human immune response. But if there is an instance of vaccine failure or reinfection then that case should be treated as high priority for genetic sequencing.”
- tux1968 6y ago
  That's not very reassuring, why is the new strain causing any problems at all if it behaves exactly like the existing strain? And if they haven't actually done any trials or testing, then they haven't really looked for any evidence. If they haven't looked for any, it seems rather too convenient to use the lack of evidence as a reason for hope that the current crop of vaccines provides any protection at all.
  - spuz 6y ago
    > why is the new strain causing any problems at all if it behaves exactly like the existing strain? If it's true that the new strain is 70% more transmissible then that means more people will get sick before we can reach immunity thanks to a vaccine, hospitals will be overwhelmed sooner and more people will die.

LatteLazy 6y ago

I live in London. The core issue here is that the government hasn't really taken any action. There are "rules" but they are full of loopholes and totally unenforced. 2 cases in particular stand out to me: Compliance with mask wearing on TFL is less than 50%. "Covid enforcement" officers walk around about one train in 50, and despite it being 8 months since this started, "I don't have one" is an acceptable answer to why you're not wearing a mask. Supermarkets continue to be rammed, but staff aren't required to wear masks. Nor are they enforcing the requirement on customers beyond the door. One staff member with covid will rapidly infect a few 1000 people given how busy they are on a Saturday morning. Wtf aren't staff required to wear masks? The attitude here is rapidly becoming "why should I bother if no one else is?". And frankly, I think the government know and encourage this. Its all but policy. Time and again we see them decline scientific advice, then act surprised when infection rates spike. I'm especially frustrated as my best friend lives in Melbourne. Despite lockdown starting at basically the same time, and some crazy bad luck/incidents, Melbourne is back to BAU.

dehrmann 6y ago
Masks might slow it, but they're everywhere in the Bay Area, and cases are rising faster than ever, and we're setting new records for new cases, so "just wear a mask in public" isn't enough.
- yibg 6y ago
  Isn’t slowing it the whole point, especially now with vaccines in the horizon? Slow it enough so that 1) hospitals aren’t overwhelmed and 2) less people die unnecessarily
  - vmception 6y ago
    the concept of velocity is too hard for people to grasp they need binary good/bad cause/effect edicts, like children. state and municipal governments are poorly catering to their own velocity based directives, and the juvenile more simplistic expectations of their population.
- 6y ago

leke 6y ago

“When the virus changes its method of attack we must change our method of defense,” What did I miss? How is this mutation attacking differently?

qz2 6y ago
Until we actually hear evidence that it is, then it’s not. But we still have to sleep with one eye open.
- pmg102 6y ago
  He means as it is more transmissible (but yes, apparently by the same routes and mechanisms) we need to tighten restrictions. A rhetorician would call these different "methods" of attack but you're right that in fact they're merely different degrees of the same method.
  - qz2 6y ago
    True and I certainly agree with that side of things.
eternalny1 6y ago
It's not. There are genetic changes, including to the spike protein that it uses to attack. > The new variant has mutations to the spike protein that the three leading vaccines are targeting. However, vaccines produce antibodies against many regions in the spike protein, so it’s unlikely that a single change would make the vaccine less effective.
LatteLazy 6y ago
That quote comes from Boris, everything he says is nonsense so just ignore it.

codeulike 6y ago

Here's a Twitter feed (a Swiss virologist I think?) with decent info on the new strain. Dr Emma Hodcroft (@firefoxx66): https://twitter.com/firefoxx66/status/1340327606303027201?s=19 https://twitter.com/firefoxx66/status/1340327606303027201?s=...

raphlinus 6y ago
I just want to confirm the quality of this source, as someone who is not actually a biologist but who has been following the scene carefully since the beginning. Dr Hodcroft is in the top tier of science communicators. This "new strain" story is basically tailor made for misinformation and poor information, as it has such a strong hook. The tl;dr as I understand it is that there may be something there, but it is too early to tell for sure.

codeulike 6y ago

A lot of you missing the context of what's been going on here in recent days - they've seen an unexpected spike in infections and it seems to correlate with a strain with an unusually high number of mutations. So they're not totally sure the new strain is responsible but it looks serious enough to get extra cautious. By tracking the growth of that strain then reckon it's 70% more easily spread. That could be statistical fluke due to a series of superspreader events or something like that but it seems less likely day by day. See here for strain analysis https://twitter.com/firefoxx66/status/1340327606303027201 https://twitter.com/firefoxx66/status/1340327606303027201

randomsearch 6y ago
They’ve seen a spike in infections in a densely populated mega city in the busiest shopping weeks of the year, when (anecdotally) people are not taking precautions and social distancing. In what way is that unexpected?
- codeulike 6y ago
  True, and that's what I thought a few days ago. But they've also been tracking growth of the new strain at the same time. New strain has been responsible for a growing proportion of positive tests. May be coincidence, but they are being cautious. E.g. see graph here https://twitter.com/The_Soup_Dragon/status/1340349639946629120?s=19 https://twitter.com/The_Soup_Dragon/status/13403496399466291... Edit: complete conjecture but if new strain is more infectious but less dangerous it might actually be helpful in the long run as it might displace other strains. Fingers crossed
- DanBC 6y ago
  The spike isn't just in London, but across the south east. https://twitter.com/Davewwest/status/1339918672811462657?s=20 https://twitter.com/Davewwest/status/1339918672811462657?s=2... https://twitter.com/avds/status/1340355825471287299?s=20 https://twitter.com/avds/status/1340355825471287299?s=20 https://twitter.com/VictimOfMaths/status/1340010730687492096?s=20 https://twitter.com/VictimOfMaths/status/1340010730687492096... This one shows high rates for Medway: https://twitter.com/RP131/status/1338158031067033601?s=20 https://twitter.com/RP131/status/1338158031067033601?s=20

edh649 6y ago

For those (like me) who are looking for some more details of this new strain, I found 2 papers from the `COVID-19 Genomics Consortium UK (CoG-UK)` of great interest. It seems like the prime reasons for concern are increased frequency of mutations, increased proportion of cases, and possible change in immune response > Several aspects of this cluster are noteworthy for epidemiological and biological reasons and we report preliminary findings below. In summary: The B.1.1.7 lineage accounts for an increasing proportion of cases in parts of England. The number of B.1.1.7 cases, and the number of regions reporting B.1.1.7 infections, are growing. B.1.1.7 has an unusually large number of genetic changes, particularly in the spike protein. Three of these mutations have potential biological effects that have been described previously to varying extents: > - Mutation N501Y is one of six key contact residues within the receptor-binding domain (RBD) and has been identified as increasing binding affinity to human and murine ACE2. > - The spike deletion 69-70del has been described in the context of evasion to the human immune response but has also occurred a number of times in association with other RBD changes. > - Mutation P681H is immediately adjacent to the furin cleavage site, a known location of biological significance. > The rapid growth of this lineage indicates the need for enhanced genomic and epidemiological surveillance worldwide and laboratory investigations of antigenicity and infectivity. https://www.cogconsortium.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Report-1_COG-UK_19-December-2020_SARS-CoV-2-Mutations.pdf https://www.cogconsortium.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Repo... https://virological.org/t/preliminary-genomic-characterisation-of-an-emergent-sars-cov-2-lineage-in-the-uk-defined-by-a-novel-set-of-spike-mutations/563 https://virological.org/t/preliminary-genomic-characterisati...

asdff 6y ago
Anecdotally I know a family where every member tested positive for COVID in the spring with severe symptoms at the time. They recovered, then over thanksgiving they started experiencing very mild symptoms (some none at all, others loss of taste and smell to more typical cold like symptoms), and all tested positive once again. It might be that after you contracted COVID once, or a particular strain of COVID once, that you have a heightened immune response and less severe symptoms when you do catch the disease again. It is hard to say for sure what is going on from an isolated case, but this certainly doesn't bode well.

aazaa 6y ago

> “There is no current evidence to suggest the new strain causes a higher mortality rate or that it affects vaccines and treatments, although urgent work is underway to confirm this,” [England’s Chief Medical Officer] Whitty said. That evidence would presumably come in the form of vaccinated patients developing infections from the new strain. Given that both the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines appear to have a window of about one month before full effect, it could be some time before the hypothesis can be tested.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

supernova87a 6y ago

And... countdown to hard Brexit in 12 days too.

DenisM 6y ago

Apropos of other comments. What do we think about the mask “issue”? Some people vehemently refuse to wear them, others take “just go with flow” attitude, yet others approach it with outsized religious zeal, hounding the heretics or at least giving them the stink eye. It also seems some people take great comfort on the mask, wearing it even inside their cars or waaay out in the open. Are we witnessing a religious schism in the making? Is it with us to stay, post-covid?

addicted 6y ago
The mask issue is a non issue. There are a few possibilities: 1) Masks work in preventing the spread of the virus. 2) Masks don’t work in preventing the spread of the virus. If we don’t wear masks, then: under (1) we have hundreds of thousands of deaths, millions of sickness instances, and hundreds of billions of lost dollars due to reduced economic activity and sickness, compared to the wearing mask scenario. (2) There’s very little difference. Some may say we unnecessarily spend money on masks, but considering that the making of masks can employ otherwise unused resources, especially in the clothing manufacturing and distribution economy, it may actually be a positive to make and distribute masks even if they don’t work, comparable to a stimulus, but more effective because all of the money is immediately deployed, and not just saved, and there are far fewer ideological issues with giving money away for nothing, and it does not require any deficit spending. Further, even if masks don’t help with COVID, they will help reduce chances of spreading other diseases and therefore reduce the strain on hospitals. Now if you further consider that there is a lot of evidence to indicate that masks do have an effect, and the countries that have handled COVID best by and large swear by them, it’s an absolute no brained to mandate them.
zepearl 6y ago
> It also seems some people take great comfort on the mask, wearing it even inside their cars or waaay out in the open. Initially, in March, I had similar thoughts - in my case it's currently like this: - with the temperature being 0-5 Celsius throughout the day the mask keeps my face a bit warmer than when not wearing it. I do like it in this context :) - as I have to get off&on the bus and 2 trains, I just keep it on all the time while commuting. The recommendations are not to touch the mask's external surface (and not to indirectly get in contact with it), keeping it on all the time seems to be the least dangerous option. - wearing glasses while wearing as well a mask can be very challenging (fogging); once I finally manage to make everything work (dozens of tiny adjustments) I "freeze" my setup and keep it like that until I know that I won't need the mask anymore. Therefore, nothing extreme going on if you see me driving or walking alone with the mask on - just being practical :)

matejcs 6y ago

"You can attend places of worship for a service." This is completely unacceptable.

addicted 6y ago
It’s unconscionable that someone is allowed to p into a liquor store with a limit on the number of patrons at a time, buy a quick bottle, with minimal human interaction and easily maintained social distancing and be out within minutes, but they are not allowed to enter a building with hundreds of people at the same time, sit for hours, singing and talking to each other. /s
umanwizard 6y ago
Not everyone has the same priorities as you, and some might find it completely unacceptable to ban religious services out of fear of a virus. Hard to say who is right or wrong since it's just a function of weighting different values differently.

nojvek 6y ago

In Seattle. I was very impressed once the mask mandate was out how many people complied. Sure there were some people protesting “are you sheep?” but 99% complied. Honestly Costco and Fred Meyers + others really Amped up the game. You can’t enter if you don’t have a mask. Fred Meyers were nice enough to give you a mask if you don’t have one for free. You’d have to really be a rebel not to wear a mask. There are quite a few rebels here and there but strict enforcement by supermarkets really worked. If the police were enforcing this I bet a few African American folks would have been shot over not wearing masks. The cops here just go crazy mode for the smallest thing.

slippers 6y ago

terranform

shadowprofile77 6y ago

Let's summarize some basic realities quickly to give a picture of why lockdown was largely a farce as anything but a short-term harm reduction measure. For those of you here (I assume a slight majority at least) who live in bubbles of white collar work conditions that can easily be done remotely from within highly developed countries with fairly developed social support infrastructure and the means to amp it up for extended periods of time: The vast majority of the rest of the world is not like your bubble. Despite massive improvements in human standards of living during the last several decades, the majority of the world population in the majority of the world's countries lives in such a way that their absolutely essential daily economic needs can only be serviced by daily close interaction with dozens or hundreds of other people in urban situations. For the developing world this is a nearly universal need and even for the developed world, huge parts of the population have to do the same thing and there's simply no way for them to avoid it. Covid will spread among them no matter what kind of extreme measures a small privileged subset of the population smugly pushes for, and from there it will by one means or another filter its way upwards even to those who can indeed isolate without major immediate economic problems. So, unless a small fraction of the world that can entirely work remotely is somehow capable of completely cutting itself away from contact with the rest of the world of people who emphatically can't do this same thing, the pandemic will run its contagious course regardless of the measures taken haphazardly in one jurisdiction or another. This applies at both the global macro scale and the local scale, and unless you want to advocate an absurdly unrealistic level of social atomization continuing indefinitely with complete disregard for very real, very serious economic consequences, it's something that simply won't happen.

animal531 6y ago

It's not just in the UK. The new (currently termed) 501.V2 strain is rampant here in South Africa as well. So far it is spreading really fast, and especially among younger people (with no co-morbidities) who are becoming critically sick. We've had a pretty authoritarian year of lockdowns and tough regulations, so now compliance is way down all over the board. Some parts of the coastline has been totally closed, but since it's now our major vacation people are just swarming malls and other locations. I'm expecting a pretty big outbreak again, possibly either matching or eclipsing our previous growth that we had at the start of June.