Situation with new #sarscov2 variants is becoming harder to follow (and not just because of the names), so let me try and give a brief overview: Where are we at? What should we be worried about? And how worried?
For now there are three variants with sufficient evidence for scientists to be really concerned and I‘ll start with the newest one: P.1.
This was described on Tuesday from December samples from Manaus and had already been picked up in Japan in travelers. virological.org/t/genomic-char…
Why is it concerning? Three main reasons: 1. The place: P.1 is spreading in Manaus, which is experiencing a devastating surge after already experiencing a terrible wave of infections in March/April. @DrMikeRyan described the dire situation yesterday:
@DrMikeRyan In fact, a recent paper estimated that 75% of people in Manaus had already been infected before this wave. Any new variant spreading in that context is one to look at closely. And this is why scientists rushed to sequence genomes from there. science.sciencemag.org/content/371/65…
@DrMikeRyan 2. The mutations: P.1 carries several mutations in the spike protein like E484K, K417T, and N501Y, that have been linked in the lab to escape from antibodies or better binding to cells. Remember though that we know little about how these mutations alone impact virus in real life.
@DrMikeRyan We know even less about what they mean together. As @K_G_Andersen told me about N501Y (Nelly): “Nelly might be innocent, except maybe when she’s hanging with her bad friends”. This is why the urgent task is to understand constellations of mutations not just individual mutations.
@DrMikeRyan@K_G_Andersen 3. The similarity: The pattern of mutations of P.1 is similar to that found in another varian of concern: N501Y.V2, the variant first identified in South Africa. Both have N501Y and E484K and both have a mutation at position 417 (though a different one).
@DrMikeRyan@K_G_Andersen And as @JesseBloom told me: “Anytime you see the same mutations arising and starting to spread multiple times, in different viral strains across the world, that’s really strong evidence that there’s some evolutionary advantage to those mutations.”
@DrMikeRyan@K_G_Andersen@JesseBloom IF 75% were already infected in Manaus, then 3 ways to explain surge, @EvolveDotZoo told me: 1. P.1 doesn’t matter. Immunity is waning and people are getting infected again. 2. P.1 is better at reinfecting people. 3. P.1 is more transmissible (threshold for herd immunity higher)
@DrMikeRyan@K_G_Andersen@JesseBloom@EvolveDotZoo It could, of course, also be a combination of these three factors. But it should be clear from this why the situation around P.1 is concerning and why figuring out what is going on in Manaus is one of the urgent puzzles of this pandemic.
@DrMikeRyan@K_G_Andersen@JesseBloom@EvolveDotZoo Even if P.1 and/or 501Y.V2 turn out to be better at reinfecting people that would likely be a gradual effect. It also doesn’t mean they are resistant to the vaccines. But that we are even talking about it is a warning sign. We need to adjust expectations and we need to prepare.
@DrMikeRyan@K_G_Andersen@JesseBloom@EvolveDotZoo As @BillHanage told me: "We spent months talking about how slow the mutation rate is. I think it is smart to get ready to make different vaccines, and smooth regulatory pathways, so that we can plug-and-play. Because this is going to keep happening.”
@DrMikeRyan@K_G_Andersen@JesseBloom@EvolveDotZoo@BillHanage Make no mistake: Most researchers I talk to agree on this. And it marks a shift. This shift is not simply due to mutations accruing which was to be expected. It’s because we are seeing the virus essentially make evolutionary “leaps” to certain combinations of worrying mutations.
@DrMikeRyan@K_G_Andersen@JesseBloom@EvolveDotZoo@BillHanage So what is needed? Basically what @WHO’s emergency committee called for:
More genomic surveillance and sharing of the data.
More research into what these variants really mean. (UK’s new consortium G2P-UK seems like a good start, but more needed.)
@DrMikeRyan@K_G_Andersen@JesseBloom@EvolveDotZoo@BillHanage@WHO Finally, a word about B.1.1.7, the variant first identified in England. The evidence has become stronger and stronger over time that this is more transmissible (but it likely has litte effect on immunity).
@DrMikeRyan@K_G_Andersen@JesseBloom@EvolveDotZoo@BillHanage@WHO So let me end with what @angie_rasmussen told me about the US, where many hospitals are at capacity.
“Further increases in transmission can tip us over the edge where the system collapses. Then we’ll start seeing potentially huge increases in mortality.”
So what have I learnt about #misinformation research? I tried to condense it into a list of the 5 biggest challenges the field faces.
Second story in my package of stories about misinformation research is up here (and thread to come):
Let me start with the first:
What even is misinformation?
When I started reporting on the field, eager to delve into things I was really frustrated that I kept coming back to this basic question. I told friends it felt like trying to take a deep dive in a puddle, always forced back to the surface.
In retrospect, it seems obvious that this was going to be a thorny problem that I would have to spend a lot of time on. The definition you use really defines the shape of the problem and it also kinda helps to be sure you're talking about the same thing as your interview partner...
I’ve reported on infectious diseases for 15 years, but during the covid-19 pandemic and even more during the global outbreak of mpox clade IIb, I was shocked by the amount of misinformation I was seeing. Misinfo had always been part of any outbreak, but this felt different.
I ended up spending almost a year at MIT as a Knight Science Journalism Fellow (@KSJatMIT) to try and understand misinformation/disinformation better, to - I hope - be a better infectious disease journalist.
It’s been an interesting experience in turns fascinating and frustrating and when I went back to full-time science writing earlier this year I decided to try and put at least some of what I’ve learnt into words.
I'm seeing a lot of confusion already out there about #mpox and the differences between clades and lineages. I will get into this in more detail later, but for now:
We really don't know for sure whether there is any material difference between clade Ia, Ib, IIa and IIb.
The differences we see might have very little to do with the virus and everything to do with it affecting different populations in different places and spreading different ways once it gets into certain contact networks. Real world data is not comparing apples and apples here...
We will learn a lot in the coming weeks and months and things will become much clearer. But for now there is a lot of uncertainty. My advice as always: Don’t trust anyone who pretends that things are clear and obvious.
In May I wrote about researchers' plans to infect cows in high-security labs with avian influenza #H5N1 to better understand the infections and how easily the virus is transmitted. The results from two of these experiments are now out here in a preprint: biorxiv.org/content/10.110…
WHAT DID THEY DO?
In one experiment (at Kansas State University) 6 calves were infected with an #H5N1 isolate from the current outbreak oronasally and then housed together with three uninfected animals ("sentinels") two days later.
In the other experiment (at Friedrich Loeffler Institut) 3 lactating cows were infected through the udder with an #H5N1 isolate from the US outbreak and 3 other lactating cows the same way with a different #H5N1 isolate from a wild bird in Europe.
One question at the heart of the #h5n1 outbreak in US cows has been: Is there something special about this virus? Or is H5N1 generally able to do this and this particular version was just "in the right place at the right time"?
Quick thread, because it seems we have an answer
Researchers in Germany have done an experiment in a high-security lab infecting cows directly with the strain of #H5N1 circulating in cows in the US (B3.13) and infecting others with an #h5n1 strain from a wild bird in Germany.
(I wrote about the plans here: )science.org/content/articl…
In both cases they infected the udders directly through the teats and in both cases the animals got sick. They "showed clear signs of disease such as a sharp drop in milk production, changes in milk consistency and fever." That suggests there is nothing special about B3.13.
The thing that I find most frustrating about the entire mpox/gain-of-function debate is how the uncertainties that lie at the base of it all just become cemented as certainties that are then carried forward.
(If you know anything about me you know I love me some uncertainty...)
Most importantly: The interim report on the investigation into these experiments released on Tuesday numerous times calls clade II "more transmissible" or even "much more transmissible".
But that is a claim that has very little evidence at all.
In fact you can find plenty of literature that argue the exact opposite, that in fact clade I is more transmissible.
Just, as an example, here is Texas HHS:
"Clade I MPXV, which may be more transmissible and cause more severe infection than Clade II..." dshs.texas.gov/news-alerts/he…