Guardian, NY Times and Liberation criticise Conservative Britain - shock
Indeed, whereas serious scientists suggest that it is precisely because of Britain's superior genomics capabilities that we have identified (and reported promptly, unlike most countries) this strain so early.
So Britain is being criticized for being both competent and honest. Not exactly what global health needs in dealing with a pandemic.
Why are we so worried about this particular strain, out of the thousands of mutations every virus goes through?
What makes this strain so special?
As far as I have read, it has many more mutations than most strains - 17 genotypic changes of which 12 translate into phenotypic changes. The issues:
- The key mutation, a deletion, seems to have evolved independently at least three times, including in both the London and South African new variants. This is highly indicative of a consequential mutation that is beneficial to the strain's propagation relative to other strains. - The deletion seems to improve marginally the virus' ability to resist the immune response to it, perhaps increasing an infected person's ability to infect others by several hours. Just this small increase in the infectivity window can contribute to greater transmissibility. The statistical correlation between this strain and new COVID transmissions, is AIUI, strongly suggestive that this strain is indeed significantly more transmissible rather than just out-competing other strains. - The number of new mutations in this strain, and the discontinuity between it and the rest of the evolutionary tree of COVID strains suggests that this strain accumulated mutations in one immune-compromised patient who suffered a prolonged infection (similar to how multi-drug resistant TB strains emerged from chronic TB patients in Russian prisons). This raises the prospect of future similar discontinuous mutations in other immune compromised patients if they suffer prolonged infections.
What this strain does not appear to do is make the disease worse, or the vaccines less effective.
Interesting and persuasive, thankyou. Given this increased transmissibility, do you think there is any hope of containing the new variant - regionally or internationally?
Yes. We'll need to get away from the idea that schools simply must be kept open though.
I don't share @Kinabalu optimism it's all a dog and pony show. I still think there's a real danger no deal may not be done at all. We're outside the EU. If we were negotiating within the EU, a deal would 100% be reached. But we're a 3rd party, so it doesn't follow.
I actually think we're very close (and despite the propaganda VDL and Boris are talking all the time, and Boris WhatsApp'ing Macron too) but thrashing out the final details on fish and governance are very difficult.
So EU is willing to negotiate post New Year, this will never end
After the new year it's no deal and then it's a completely different situation. The EU are making huge miscalculation if they believe the UK negotiating position doesn't immediately change once we're out.
I think they know this, actually. It's why they've been making late concessions.
Guardian, NY Times and Liberation criticise Conservative Britain - shock
Indeed, whereas serious scientists suggest that it is precisely because of Britain's superior genomics capabilities that we have identified (and reported promptly, unlike most countries) this strain so early.
So Britain is being criticized for being both competent and honest. Not exactly what global health needs in dealing with a pandemic.
Why are we so worried about this particular strain, out of the thousands of mutations every virus goes through?
What makes this strain so special?
As far as I have read, it has many more mutations than most strains - 17 genotypic changes of which 12 translate into phenotypic changes. The issues:
- The key mutation, a deletion, seems to have evolved independently at least three times, including in both the London and South African new variants. This is highly indicative of a consequential mutation that is beneficial to the strain's propagation relative to other strains. - The deletion seems to improve marginally the virus' ability to resist the immune response to it, perhaps increasing an infected person's ability to infect others by several hours. Just this small increase in the infectivity window can contribute to greater transmissibility. The statistical correlation between this strain and new COVID transmissions, is AIUI, strongly suggestive that this strain is indeed significantly more transmissible rather than just out-competing other strains. - The number of new mutations in this strain, and the discontinuity between it and the rest of the evolutionary tree of COVID strains suggests that this strain accumulated mutations in one immune-compromised patient who suffered a prolonged infection (similar to how multi-drug resistant TB strains emerged from chronic TB patients in Russian prisons). This raises the prospect of future similar discontinuous mutations in other immune compromised patients if they suffer prolonged infections.
What this strain does not appear to do is make the disease worse, or the vaccines less effective.
Interesting and persuasive, thankyou. Given this increased transmissibility, do you think there is any hope of containing the new variant - regionally or internationally?
Yes. We'll need to get away from the idea that schools simply must be kept open though.
You don't have kids, do you?
I am absolutely delighted the schools will be closed in Scotland. I have a school aged child.
Reviving this from the old thread as I'm interested in where the UK figure was sourced from. The article doesn't quote a UK figure for the Moderna vaccine anywhere.
The UK is paying $37 per dose of the Moderna vaccine. The EU is paying $18 per dose. Both buyers ordered 40m doses. The EU offered the UK to join its buying consortium, but the UK turned them down. This is the team negotiating Brexit terms of trade.
Hi Malcom. Where are you getting the Uk figure from?
I can't find a reliable estimate since the summer (and we hadn't ordered 40m then).
Looking at the article the person who commented on it must have either assumed or knew UK paid list price, article shows list at $37.
The EU didn't pay the list price, so why the assumption the UK did?
Rob, That I don't know, they either knew something from elsewhere or just wanted to make it look bad for UK. Probably the latter but given volumes and when ordered it is likely UK paid more but whether list or not I don't know.
I don't see that. They are just quoting the list price, they don't say anything about what the UK paid for it.
Rob, it was in the bit I pasted along with the article.
Reviving this from the old thread as I'm interested in where the UK figure was sourced from. The article doesn't quote a UK figure for the Moderna vaccine anywhere.
The UK is paying $37 per dose of the Moderna vaccine. The EU is paying $18 per dose. Both buyers ordered 40m doses. The EU offered the UK to join its buying consortium, but the UK turned them down. This is the team negotiating Brexit terms of trade.
Hi Malcom. Where are you getting the Uk figure from?
I can't find a reliable estimate since the summer (and we hadn't ordered 40m then).
Looking at the article the person who commented on it must have either assumed or knew UK paid list price, article shows list at $37.
The EU didn't pay the list price, so why the assumption the UK did?
Rob, That I don't know, they either knew something from elsewhere or just wanted to make it look bad for UK. Probably the latter but given volumes and when ordered it is likely UK paid more but whether list or not I don't know.
I don't see that. They are just quoting the list price, they don't say anything about what the UK paid for it.
The Mail had a report at the end of November (FWIW).
Reviving this from the old thread as I'm interested in where the UK figure was sourced from. The article doesn't quote a UK figure for the Moderna vaccine anywhere.
The UK is paying $37 per dose of the Moderna vaccine. The EU is paying $18 per dose. Both buyers ordered 40m doses. The EU offered the UK to join its buying consortium, but the UK turned them down. This is the team negotiating Brexit terms of trade.
Hi Malcom. Where are you getting the Uk figure from?
I can't find a reliable estimate since the summer (and we hadn't ordered 40m then).
Looking at the article the person who commented on it must have either assumed or knew UK paid list price, article shows list at $37.
The EU didn't pay the list price, so why the assumption the UK did?
Rob, That I don't know, they either knew something from elsewhere or just wanted to make it look bad for UK. Probably the latter but given volumes and when ordered it is likely UK paid more but whether list or not I don't know.
I don't see that. They are just quoting the list price, they don't say anything about what the UK paid for it.
Presumably Malcolmg always pays list price. He must: he's no true Scot
Read Nigel's post and weep oh ye of little faith @Flanner
I don't see it. (Farage as an author doesn't help obviously).
My view of the government (as a citizen) is that they're doing ok. There is of course a lot of risk that things could change.
There seems to be some degree of fellowship in the cabinet. This is a very good thing if it's there. I personally think that several ministers are performing better than they have historically - Hancock, Patel, Raab. They all have their issues, but given the absolute awfulness of what's actually going on in the world I think they're doing well.
If I'm right (and I'm speculating rather than knowing) then Boris is doing well in perhaps the most important task he has at the moment (leading the cabinet).
Despite all the flak I think that he's got some degree of respect elsewhere in parliament for dealing with all of this.
It would appear that the 'needs must' cooperation between him and the devolved governments isn't so bad.
The only real thing broken about Boris' premiership may well be just the press coverage.
Comments
Slowly but surely, Johnson's time is running out
My view of the government (as a citizen) is that they're doing ok. There is of course a lot of risk that things could change.
There seems to be some degree of fellowship in the cabinet. This is a very good thing if it's there. I personally think that several ministers are performing better than they have historically - Hancock, Patel, Raab. They all have their issues, but given the absolute awfulness of what's actually going on in the world I think they're doing well.
If I'm right (and I'm speculating rather than knowing) then Boris is doing well in perhaps the most important task he has at the moment (leading the cabinet).
Despite all the flak I think that he's got some degree of respect elsewhere in parliament for dealing with all of this.
It would appear that the 'needs must' cooperation between him and the devolved governments isn't so bad.
The only real thing broken about Boris' premiership may well be just the press coverage.