IF 75% were already infected in Manaus, then 3 ways to explain surge, @EvolveDotZoo told me:
1. P.1 doesn’t matter. Immunity is waning and people are getting infected again.
2. P.1 is better at reinfecting people.
3. P.1 is more transmissible (threshold for herd immunity higher)
-
Show this thread
-
It could, of course, also be a combination of these three factors. But it should be clear from this why the situation around P.1 is concerning and why figuring out what is going on in Manaus is one of the urgent puzzles of this pandemic.
4 replies 30 retweets 261 likesShow this thread -
Even if P.1 and/or 501Y.V2 turn out to be better at reinfecting people that would likely be a gradual effect. It also doesn’t mean they are resistant to the vaccines. But that we are even talking about it is a warning sign. We need to adjust expectations and we need to prepare.
4 replies 40 retweets 248 likesShow this thread -
As
@BillHanage told me: "We spent months talking about how slow the mutation rate is. I think it is smart to get ready to make different vaccines, and smooth regulatory pathways, so that we can plug-and-play. Because this is going to keep happening.”10 replies 109 retweets 469 likesShow this thread -
Make no mistake: Most researchers I talk to agree on this. And it marks a shift. This shift is not simply due to mutations accruing which was to be expected. It’s because we are seeing the virus essentially make evolutionary “leaps” to certain combinations of worrying mutations.
5 replies 87 retweets 372 likesShow this thread -
So what is needed? Basically what
@WHO’s emergency committee called for: More genomic surveillance and sharing of the data. More research into what these variants really mean. (UK’s new consortium G2P-UK seems like a good start, but more needed.)3 replies 37 retweets 275 likesShow this thread -
Finally, a word about B.1.1.7, the variant first identified in England. The evidence has become stronger and stronger over time that this is more transmissible (but it likely has litte effect on immunity).
4 replies 31 retweets 220 likesShow this thread -
I‘ve spent a lot of time in recent weeks explaining the evidence and why this presents a huge problem to the world. Here, for example:https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2021/01/viral-mutations-may-cause-another-very-very-bad-covid-19-wave-scientists-warn …
5 replies 103 retweets 324 likesShow this thread -
So let me end with what
@angie_rasmussen told me about the US, where many hospitals are at capacity. “Further increases in transmission can tip us over the edge where the system collapses. Then we’ll start seeing potentially huge increases in mortality.”https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2021/01/new-coronavirus-variants-could-cause-more-reinfections-require-updated-vaccines …14 replies 112 retweets 327 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @kakape @DrMikeRyan and
@zeynep has reported that the 75% number is inflated due to sampling bias1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
That it’s a possibility. It’s pretty confusing at the moment and I certainly have no “reporting” on that. Just for clarification.
-
-
Thanks for clarification - did you not report that sampling for the serosurvey was biased by free testing?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @ToddLencz @kakape and
Yes, possibly! Something to look into, for sure. I just want to make sure it’s clear that I have no direct reporting on this.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes - Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.