Private channel session 1657
13 messages over 1h 31m, 2021-11-25 – 2021-11-25.
A “conversation” here is an activity session — a run of messages with under 60 minutes of silence inside it. The channel had no native conversation boundaries.
-
@Andrew Rambaut - I hope you're wrong, but I have been saying that for months - we're just one monster variant away, and maybe this is it... I bloody hope not - but just looking at the mutations, I would be _very_ surprised if anupdated vaccine wouldn't be necessary. Not exactly square one, but it ain't great - plus, this is ignoring potential concerned about antigenic sin and/or ADE, but I don't want to think about either of those right now.
-
Let's hope we're just looking at a sampling bias here - because if we're not, it doesn't matter what we do next. [shared file(s): FFEHAdRVUAQkWKg.png]
-
Working on ourrenewal @Kristian Andersen - Hoping this is not part of the justification...."Immunosuppressed individuals are thought to be the source variants, such as Ni that accelerated the COVID-19 pandemic and drove itto new heights."
-
Let's hope not Bob. I think Nu could likely be a big problem, but surely the early data can't be correct.
-
Nu - sorry - @Andrew Rambaut put Monty Python into my head and it's going to be hard to get away from that image of the knights...
-
That graph and it's header is a bit irresponsible. Can't make those conclusions with focused sampling on a poorlyimmunized population. That said, I hope that Moderna and Pfizer have redesigned their vaccines already
-
Both Andrew and I know Sean Nee well. He was not a fan of Monty Python.
-
It was estimated today that it would take 6-9 months to get an updated mRNA vaccine to deployable stocks.
-
Pfizer were bragging they could get it ready in 100 days...I guess that's not deployable stocks though.
-
@Eddie Holmes - the graph is based on SGTF, not sequencing, so not nearly as biased. That said, it's still biased and it simply can't be correct.
-
If we assume Delta has an R0 of 6, eyeballing that graph would put B.1.1.529 at, what, 15-20? Can't be right. Problem is, it doesn't even have to be that bad - something with increased R0 over Delta would itself be deeply problematic since we can't get control of Delta as it is. If we then add what is sure to be additional immune escape (possibly near-complete), it'd be disastrous.So I'm just going to hope that it's all a fluke and that it actually has a significantly lower R0 than Delta because of that weird RBD and then it won't be able to compete.
-
@Andrew Rambaut - who's on the WHO committee?
-
Long list. Generally the people you might expect.