A single line often inverts meaning once you see what it
answers, so neighbouring messages are always shown.
-
The important addition to that question that I think is often forgotten - "in what setting". I can believe that 617 is more transmissible than 117 in certain settings (high natural immunity, high one-shot immunity, mostly), but in a naive population, is it more fit? Not so sure about that.
-
And it's worth pointing out that this is strictly an academic question, not a public health one - it's clear 617 is aproblem and we need to act, but that was clear weeks ago.
-
Just discussing that. My personal hunch has been that B117 is adapted to strong NPI by being more transmissible early but for shorter (causing more damage and thus severity). Make the most of limited number of contacts. 617.2may have a longer pre-symptom period making it better in a more free-for-all environment (i.e., unfortunate timing asUK restrictions have lifted).
-
Yeah, that's an interesting theory - although it seems like 117 may actually also infect for longer? Did Oli ever do anyof the modeling analyses to try and flesh these differences out a little more?
-
2021-05-27 13:34
Edward C. Holmes
I wonder if they have enough material to shotgun sequence the environmental samples from the market? Might tell them want animals were being sold my looking at the expressed host genes (e.g. COII). Doesn't even need to be the virus positive samples although they would be better.
-
Well, fuck me - so obvious and honestly I had not thought about it. Yes, they should and yes that should be totallydoable.
-
Could do a COI amplification - i.e., species barcoding?
-
I'll see if I can get George and Weifeng to do it
-
Yeah, they should really get on it - metagenomic sequencing should be sufficient. It'll be messy, but not a lot of data needed to do meaningful IDs