Chat message

Slack / Private Message Drop, p.549 [SLACK_000763] · slack_pm:msg:05721

Date: 2021-02-25 09:10
Type: chat message · slack
recipient: Kristian G. Andersen, Robert F. Garry, Edward C. Holmes
speaker: Andrew Rambaut
Topics: Natural origin / zoonotic spillover

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

This was happening occasionally - a false positive P.1. probably due to convergence. We have fixed this now in the latest pangolin so P.1s will only be called based on having 5 or more of the defining mutations.

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
We have fixed this now in the latest pangolin so P.1s will only be called based on having 5 or more of the defining mutations.	own voice, substantive	speaker_own	asserts

Statement

Grade

Attribution

Stance

We have fixed this now in the latest pangolin so P.1s will only be called based on having 5 or more of the defining mutations.

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.

2021-02-25 07:57 Kristian G. Andersen open

I'm talking to Charles later this morning btw - I think he got a little spooked and is realizing that maybe his data isshit... I think the potential transmission advantage of the variant is interesting, so worth looking at that further - but not the way Charles did. Won't matter in a few weeks though - B.1.1.7 is going in for the knockout.
2021-02-25 08:04 Robert F. Garry open

@Kristian Andersen Heparin sulfate binding I think.
2021-02-25 08:37 Kristian G. Andersen open

Charles actually looked at binding of W152C in his 'paper'. Decreased binding - by quite a bit (manu above). [shared file(s): Screen Shot 2021-02-25 at 08.36.44.png]
2021-02-25 08:52 Kristian G. Andersen open

@Andrew Rambaut - I assume this isn't actually a pango issue, right? [shared file(s): Screen Shot 2021-02-25 at 08.51.50.png]
2021-02-25 09:10 Andrew Rambaut

This was happening occasionally - a false positive P.1. probably due to convergence. We have fixed this now in the latest pangolin so P.1s will only be called based on having 5 or more of the defining mutations.

Full conversation →