A view of COVID, heading into the Christmas period; ultimately a European, with strong focus on the UK view.
Context: I am an expert at (human/vertebrate) genetics and computational biology; I know experts in infectious disease testing and modelling, clinical trials, immunology. I have a COI in that I am long standing consultant to Oxford Nanopore, which makes a new COVID test.
A reminder: SARS-CoV-2 is coronavirus which jumped from another species late last year into humans; it is reasonably infectious in humans and causes a horrible disease in a subset of humans (older; male; obese) often leading to death.
If we let the virus infect all of us, not only would a subset of people die quickly, and another subset have a horrible long term disease, but also no healthcare system could cope with that number of ill people at once.
Thankfully medical research has given a host of better treatments (halving the rate of death of this disease) and, most amazingly, now a number of vaccines which interim analysis has shown 3 to be safe and work; one has passed regulation to be used.
But this is still a very fragile situation; despite the remarkable imminent vaccination, other regulators need to approve in their own jurisdictions, and the other vaccines need to go through this approval >>
<< more importantly, the logistics of vaccinating a large proportion, ideally nearly all, of a population is eye-wateringly complex. Every country has plans, and these plans will unfold over January. For sure there will be bumps in this road just because of the number of steps.
So, despite this respite on the horizon, countries are going to have to continue to suppress transmission of the virus for quite a few months yet; there is still a very mixed success across Europe for this
The most reliable and consistent way to suppress transmission is harsh restriction of socialisation - work, education and fun. Letting some of the above happen requires prompt testing, informing contacts ('manually' by phone or digitally) and enforcing hyper-local isolation.
Most European countries are working out how to titrate the right blanket measures across the population to work with the per-individual or per-region measures. It is complex work in itself, with many moving parts; much can go wrong.
One example is the North Kent coast in the UK, where the England-wide lockdown 2.0 did not prevent growth in cases. Similarly, Hildburghausen in Southern Germany grew in the context of "lockdown light" in Germany.
The upcoming holidays has challenges - how does Christmas and getting through the dark winter nights work when we're in the midst of this struggle? What do we do and what rules or guidance do governments make?
Other challenges include a large scale shift in contact patterns as university students come home (a bigger issue in the UK than say France or Germany where universities are often more local)
However, there might also be benefits - when university and school stop for the holidays there will be less contact patterns via those routes.
As suspected from the southern hemisphere, the restriction on socialisation is also slowing other respiratory diseases (eg, 'flu) but we really be sure of this until mid-Janurary.
Healthcare service capacity and morale is another careful thing. Winters are always hard work (in particular in the famously frugal UK NHS in terms of capacity) - navigating winter and COVID after the spring of 2020 is asking alot of doctors and nurses
(An aside - the stoic, let's get on with it and solve today's problems, see today's patients, repeat next shift that I see from so many of the clinical colleagues I know I am rather in awe of)
I think all healthcare services will breathe easier when the majority of their front-line staff are vaccinated - less shielding and isolation, less time off, more flexibile deployments inside hospitals.
I feel this world can be hopeful about the future, but it is a very fragile future - the vaccine roll out will have to be well established and working through the at risk groups until we can really say that safe future is growing in our hands.
And even then we will have to be careful, and play our parts until we have the new normal of 2021 at some point.
But there's proper hope. There is a better 2021 for us all - let's not mess up getting there.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
I've recently navigated some COVID19 vaccine conversations with friends and friends of friends and wanted to give my take on why I - and you - should be confident to take them. Structured here as a Q&A:
(Context: I am a human genetics/computational biology expert; I know virus experts and clinical trials experts but I am not one myself; I am a trial participant on one COVID vaccine trial, the Oxford / AZ one).
Is the vaccine really safe? Surely if it has been done so quickly they've cut some corners?
Experienced software architect / standards expert? Want to make the world a better place by enabling responsible genomics and other health data sharing? This job, Chief Standards Officer of @GA4GH is for you: embl.de/jobs/searchjob…
(colleagues - please retweet or pop this tweet under the nose of people who you think might be interested)
@GA4GH is the global standards organisation to coordinate responsible data sharing between healthcare organisations through to research in genomics (DNA, RNA, Proteomics).
My perspective on the COVID world, this cold November night in London
Context: I am an expert at genetics + computational biology. I know experts in viral testing, clinical trials, infectious epidemiology, immunology and cell biology of viruses. I have a COI in that I am a long established paid consultant to Oxford Nanopore which makes a COVID test
A reminder. SARS-CoV-2 is an infectious virus which causes a serious disease, COVID19, in a subset of people (more likely in people who are older, male, overweight) often leading to death. If we left the virus to move through the population many people would die quickly.
There are some good and bad hot takes about the Oxford/AZ vaccine going around - I'd like to add my view which I hope is more light than heat.
Context: I am not a clinical trials expert, (rather a computational biologist / genomics expert) and I have an interest because I am trials participant in the Oxford/AZ trial.
The headache in this trial reporting is that a dosing error/operational change made a different dosing regieme which looks more effective. This has complicated analysis, reporting and communication.
Great thread by Adam as ever on transmission risk. I want to highlight what we collectively do around at risk people, mainly people >60 old, in particular >70, obese, male over Christmas.
Adding to transmission levels overall will be bad news but can be buffered elsewhere in the system. Eg regions in Tier 2 might move up to Tier 3. But infections to at risk people run a serious chance of irreversible impact of hospitalisation and very possibly death
(base line numbers >70 is around ~5% chance of dieing if infected; this goes up if you are overweight and if you are male. It is a serious, appreciable chance).
More musings on human genetics and race, but this time from a personal level to explain I think the different ways people "think about" racism and their role in it.
In this thread I am going to be critical about how many people think about broad structural racism/unconscious bias, but I will do this via critiquing my younger self, as it is super-hard to do this broadly without offending people; I can own offending myself :)
In my 20s I spent a fair bit of time in America and considered myself reasonably cool and trendy - worked hard at Cold Spring Harbor Laboratories, partied hard in NYC and Harvard, where I had friends.