COVID-19 Records

Chat message

Slack / Private Message Drop, p.301 [SLACK_000515] · slack_pm:msg:03145

Page text: p.301 · original PDF

Date
2020-12-06 12:02
Type
chat message · slack
recipient
Robert F. Garry, Edward C. Holmes, Andrew Rambaut
speaker
Kristian G. Andersen
Topics
Intelligence community assessmentsNatural origin / zoonotic spillover

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

Yeah, clearly a lot more cases going around at that time than was appreciated - and obviously not (directly) linked tothe seafood market. We don't really see any evidence of other "WA1" lineages in Wuhan, do we? All those early ones were "Hu-1"?

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.

StatementGradeAttributionStance
Yeah, clearly a lot more cases going around at that time than was appreciated - and obviously not (directly) linked tothe seafood market. own voice, substantive speaker_own asserts

In context

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

  1. 2020-12-06 11:18 Kristian G. Andersen open
    I'm heading out for an hour, but once I'm back lemme just clean up these alignments a little and share - just so wehave them archived here. :beer:
  2. 2020-12-06 11:38 Andrew Rambaut open
    > On January 21, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) confirmed the first U.S. case in a 35-year-old man living in Snohomish County. He had returned from Wuhan, China after visiting his family there, tothe U.S., landing at Seattle-Tacoma International Airport on January 15, without any symptoms.
  3. 2020-12-06 11:41 Andrew Rambaut open
    And of course at that time Imperial College estimated Wuhan had 190-4000 cases by 12th Jan based on 3 exported cases.
  4. 2020-12-06 12:00 Edward C. Holmes open
    @Kristian Andersen They also used my quote out of context...I was just referring to some of those shonky studies, particularly the Indian-origin one.
  5. 2020-12-06 12:02 Kristian G. Andersen
    Yeah, clearly a lot more cases going around at that time than was appreciated - and obviously not (directly) linked tothe seafood market. We don't really see any evidence of other "WA1" lineages in Wuhan, do we? All those early ones were "Hu-1"?
  6. 2020-12-06 12:06 Kristian G. Andersen open
    Probable scenario - ongoing undetected transmission in Wuhan building up, then a big super spreading event at the seafood market where it gets detected. Cases following are then connected to that event and most genomes are sequenced from the super spreading event, but not the emergence. Makes sense I think
  7. 2020-12-06 12:07 Kristian G. Andersen open
    The emergence itself could have been anywhere, but transmission probably got going in Wuhan (but not at the seafood market - that's a SSE)
  8. 2020-12-06 12:07 Kristian G. Andersen open
    "Anywhere [in China]"
  9. 2020-12-06 12:08 Edward C. Holmes open
    Total sense and I fully agree. I suspect the emergence event took place elsewhere and was imported into Wuhan.

Full conversation →