COVID-19 Records

Chat message

Slack / Private Message Drop, p.109 [SLACK_000323] · slack_pm:msg:01119

Page text: p.109 · original PDF

Date
2020-07-27 14:50
Type
chat message · slack
recipient
Robert F. Garry, Edward C. Holmes, Andrew Rambaut
speaker
Kristian G. Andersen

Recipients on this medium are inferred from channel membership, not per-message addressing.

.... ehm, yes. That is, of course, true... Unless it's been in a freezer since that outbreak in the Mojiang mine...:parrot:

In context

A single line often inverts meaning once you see what it answers, so neighbouring messages are always shown.

  1. 2020-07-27 14:43 Andrew Rambaut open
    It also makes no sense that the SARS2 diversity circulating now was part of the pre-circulating scenario. The Wuhanhaplotype may have been around for a month or two prior to Dec 2019 but not much longer given the transmissibilityof the virus. This virus doesn't lurk unobserved.
  2. 2020-07-27 14:45 Andrew Rambaut open
    Has Trevor found his next thing to go off on Twitter about?
  3. 2020-07-27 14:46 Kristian G. Andersen open
    "This virus doesn't lurk unobserved" - as is, definitely true - but I _do_ wonder if a pre-furin site virus could. But Iagree with you - I'm not sure such an analysis makes sense given our limited sampling. Assuming SARS2 came outof Yunnan diversity (which seems likely), it would be cool to go do some in-depth sampling from there. And yes, maybe we'll get the big reveal on Twitter :wink:
  4. 2020-07-27 14:48 Andrew Rambaut open
    But if the acquisition of the furin site is the point at which it becomes epidemic then once again we are back to the common ancestor of the current diversity being in late 2019. We don't have any other nodes to date.
  5. 2020-07-27 14:50 Kristian G. Andersen
    .... ehm, yes. That is, of course, true... Unless it's been in a freezer since that outbreak in the Mojiang mine...:parrot:
  6. 2020-07-27 14:55 Kristian G. Andersen open
    And @Robert Garry - I have come around on challenge testing... What I really want to see is early challenge trials invery small (~10-20) groups of people to establish efficacy. If it doesn't work in those, no need to move forward... I'm SUPER uncomfortable with 30,000 people now getting the Moderna vaccine - can you imagine how detrimental thisis going to be for (COVID and otherwise) vaccine research if this vaccine actually isn't safe? Or may even lead toADE?Let's hope it works...
  7. 2020-07-27 15:03 Robert F. Garry open
    Yeah - that's a good idea - you could get down to the best set of candidates with 10-20 person trials in a few months. Same with the monoclonals, though showing protection in animals before the in-ppl screening would be good.
  8. 2020-07-27 15:09 Kristian G. Andersen open
    Yup.
  9. 2020-07-27 15:09 Kristian G. Andersen open
    Okay, so back to topic - Eddie and I just received this from Jon. This is serious !channel, so we need to consider this carefully. [shared file(s): Screen Shot 2020-07-27 at 3.08.41 PM.png]

Full conversation →