Chat message

Slack / Private Message Drop, p.135 [SLACK_000349] · slack_pm:msg:01377

Date: 2020-08-14 14:27
Type: chat message · slack
recipient: Robert F. Garry, Edward C. Holmes, Andrew Rambaut
speaker: Kristian G. Andersen
Topics: Intelligence community assessments

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

Whether correct or not, pretty interesting though - especially given the pretty strong political line that this is due toreturn travelers (could be - but I'm also not sure about that...).

Extracted statements

Rule-extracted, not adjudicated. The grade says what may be done with each one; read the document above before relying on any of them.

Statement	Grade	Attribution	Stance
Whether correct or not, pretty interesting though - especially given the pretty strong political line that this is due toreturn travelers (could be - but I'm also not sure about that...).	quoted / not their view	hypothetical conditional framing	questions

Statement

Grade

Attribution

Stance

Whether correct or not, pretty interesting though - especially given the pretty strong political line that this is due toreturn travelers (could be - but I'm also not sure about that...).

quoted / not their view

hypothetical conditional framing

questions

In context

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

2020-08-14 14:25 Edward C. Holmes open

Are we sure that the NextStrain tree is just massively subsampled, missing key background lineages?
2020-08-14 14:25 Kristian G. Andersen open

Yeah, that's what I thought too - returning travelers and quarantine issues. I should have clarified that the statementI shared is from the most recent Nextstrain narrative: https://nextstrain.org/narratives/ncov/sit-rep/2020-08-14.I'm not sure we can really conclude it's local acquired from this data, but I haven't looked at it directly (so I'm not sure whether I agree or disagree with the Nextstrain folks here...)
2020-08-14 14:26 Kristian G. Andersen open

And yes - my concern exactly relates to whether subsampling has taken out necessary context - combined with bias,of course.
2020-08-14 14:27 Edward C. Holmes open

I'm going to ask around about this. At face value it's either a massive fuck-up by the people analysing the data or it'sirresponsible subsampling from NextStrain.
2020-08-14 14:27 Kristian G. Andersen

Whether correct or not, pretty interesting though - especially given the pretty strong political line that this is due toreturn travelers (could be - but I'm also not sure about that...).
2020-08-14 14:29 Edward C. Holmes open

True! I'm on it. Thanks for pointing this out!!
2020-08-14 14:32 Kristian G. Andersen open

You bet - definitely worth an extra (careful...) look. They made some conclusions on our Baja / SoCal sequences that are definitely not correct though, so something tokeep in mind (in this particular point, it's impossible to say whether the virus moved South (as suggested), North, orfrom some completely different location). [shared file(s): Screen Shot 2020-08-14 at 2.29.40 PM.png]
2020-08-14 14:32 Edward C. Holmes open

My money is on NextStrain screwing it up.
2020-08-14 14:32 Kristian G. Andersen open

And just for reference - here's the wording from our own report [shared file(s): Screen Shot 2020-08-14 at 2.32.03PM.png]

Full conversation →