A COVID viewpoint from increasingly cold London. TL;DR the world vaccination situation is improving, but there is a long way to go; Europe is entering a winter exit to endemicity surge; the UK is a leading country in this exit surge with internal angst, strife and screw ups
Context: I am an expert in human genetics and computational biology. I know experts in infectious disease epidemiology, viral genomics, immunology and clinical trials. I have COIs - I am consultant and shareholder of Oxford Nanopore and I was on the Ox/AZ trial.
Reminder: SARS-CoV-2 is now the fifth endemic coronavirus that infects humans, and by far the nastiest. For a subset (older, overweight, male) of people is causes a horrible disease, COVID, in which some people die, and many people have horrible time in hospital or longCOVID
Thankfully unprecedently fast clinical research have provided now a suite of vaccines that work well (and some that did not; but that's the nature of this) and when people are vaccinated hospitalisation and death are far less likely (~2 fold to 20 fold less depending on age)
48% of the world is now vaccinated with at least one dose; perhaps unsurprisingly this is not evenly distributed, with most of the rich world fully vaccinated except for ideological anti-vaxers. However, there are many countries with virtual no vaccination levels
For both moral reasons of preventing harm and death, for equity reasons worldwide and narrow economic and health reasons in rich countries given the interconnection of the world getting vaccines to everyone on the planet is the most important thing.
Over time SARS-CoV-2 has evolved primarily to become more transmissible - it is at least 2 fold more transmissible, and will infect and transmit in many vaccinated contexts. Furthermore it has found some animal resevoirs (which still need to be characterised).
This higher transmission level, global reach of the virus and likely animal resevoirs means the virus almost certainly will be with us for the forseeable future, ("endemic" in science speak), as the other 4 human coronaviruses are (they cause "the common cold").
As such the mid to long term strategy has been on working out how to reduce hospitalisations in the context of the circulating virus. This "exit to endemicity" is complex as it is unclear if any place has reached it and what the final balance of transmission/hospitalisations
Two particular developments are reasons to more hopeful; firstly 3rd doses of vaccines (boosters) seem to really improve protection, and the mRNA vaccines (Pfzier and Moderna) seem best. Secondly new effective drugs have been developed, with an earlier in hospitalisation drug.
However it seems likely that a substantial amount of transmission has to happen (natural infection seems to give more protection than vaccines), and it is hard to imagine "boosters" quickly into the European winter across the entire population.
As such it is likely that Europe (and US) will go into another wave, but this time a wave where more people are protected by vaccines, ideally with boosters if older. There is low appetite for lockdowns- unclear why buying time would help if you've vaxed as much as possible.
Some countries in Europe have recently started down this path, and the UK was more deliberately relaxed during the summer, with higher infection levels and has entered the autumn and winter with high transmission.
At one level this has been a remarkable proof of the efficacy of vaccines - this UK "plateau" of infections has not triggered the levels of hospitalisations in 2020 or 2021.
On the other side, the UK seemingly meandered in its vaccine decisions for boosters and teenage vaccines and did not prioritise the booster campaign in early autumn despite excellent initial vaccine roll out in Jan 2020.
This was not helped by the final step of Public Health England reorganisation (into HSA) which had a massive QA failure of an company that did PCR testing in the South West, with many people not getting their positive result.
This awful occurence has neatly shown the effectiveness of good testing and information (it clearly has an impact) but created even more transmission in the South West which they are getting over.
Furthermore, given this somewhat relaxed approach, simple things (in England) to slow transmission whilst boosters were administered, such as mask wearing or ventilation were handed over to "personal responsibility" /"company's judgement" and have become, sadly, tribal signifiers
This was most obviously seen in the House of Commons (an indoor setting with lots of people) with a split in the middle of the room of mask wearers and mask deniers. As masks *definitely slow down transmission* and the booster campaign *has not finished* this is all... stupid.
However, masks yes/no are probably more marginal than people think (most obviously shown by the high transmission rates in Wales and Scotland with mask mandates); in the big picture the anti-vax mentality in Saxony in Germany or US Red states is far more dangerous.
underlying all of this though seems a mix of indifference to taking one's eye off the ball in the UK (England in particular). This now has spooked everyone (probably should have earlier) and there is more urgency to the booster campaign (no reversal though on masks)
Much of Eastern Europe is joining the UK in higher transmission, with some countries going back to lockdown like conditions (eg Latvia). I think the key parameter is going to be 1st/2nd dose levels in over 50 year olds for weathering the winter, then booster roll out.
It seems pretty inevitable that most of western europe will join, and indeed Belgium, Netherlands and Germany have all seen sharp up ticks from far low transmission bases (though the UK tests deep now, so the raw case numbers are not apples to apples between countries).
The between country comparison is natural but only helpful for understanding what one can do (eg, FFP3 masks in shared indoor spaces is not some affront to democracy); one has to remind yourself this is not a between country race; it is a war between humanity and virus.
And that takes me back to the most important thing; getting the entire world (at least those >50) vaccinated. That is the single most important goal in the remainder of 2021 and no doubt 2022.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
COVID thoughts on an autumnal London day. TL;DR the developed vaccinated world has some tricky navigation, but is probably entering some endemic-ish state; the developed unvaccinated world is a bit mad and needs help; the rest of the world needs vaccines.
Context: I am an expert in genetics/genomics and computational biology. I know experts in infectious epidemiology, viral genomics, clinical trials and immunology. I have COIs; I am long established consultant to Oxford Nanopore and I was on the Ox/Az clinical trial.
Reminder: SARS-CoV-2 is an airborne virus. The latest variant, now globally dominant, transmits rapidly and all variants causes a horrible disease in subset of people - older, more overweight, male. Left unchecked many people would die and healthcare systems overwhelmed.
In general the response I think to the announcement of a polygenic-risk-score informed embryo selection has been right - one where the science is wrong, the clinical harm/benefit therefore also wrong, and one where ethical/societal considerations have to be folded in. However...
There are some people who say "but even if this is wrong now, it might not in the future" (true) and also "if genetics works, then this should work" often with some handwaving towards farm animal genetics/breeding/selection. In this twitter thread I'd like to tackle this.
(Context: I am a geneticist/genomicist. My two favourite organisms to study humans and Japanese rice paddy fish. I'm on the experiments/practical data science side, but have a pretty good understanding of the theory/stats side, partly because I've coded it myself/in my group)
A reminder; in the UK this process would clearly fall under HFEA, and applications to do this would almost certainly be rejected on ethical / societal grounds, on clinical harm to benefit and underlying scientific validity
I’m very positive about the use of genomics in healthcare - many diverse uses and its growing - but I am firmly against this use on ethics, clinical (I’m not an expert) and science (I am an expert). Blogged on this in 2019 ewanbirney.com/2019/05/why-em…
I think the imperial weights thing in the UK is silly (deeply silly) but I do think there was more method in "12" units (and for that matter, 60). 12 is a nice number for division (halves, thirds, quarters, sixths) and then the next nice number for division is 60 (fifths).
Of course the pounds to stone (14!) and then madness of Guineas (I still don't really understand) doesn't fit this. On historical numerology, I was reminded of the arcane voting system for the Dodge in Venice that involves 11, 13s and 17s as supposed "hard to game" prime numbers
As well as the measuring unit changing depending on what you were measuring (this is another moment of deep madness) I think this use of effectively base 12 might be more about early medieaval maths and plenty of mental arithmetic.
After a great workshop in Paris (and hopefully, testing being ok, I will be returning next week) I've been thinking about my travel in the new normal, thinking about green (lowering carbon)
This has been informed by conversations with colleagues such as @embl's green officer, @BrenRouseHD, faculty colleagues such as @Alexbateman1, @PaulFlicek and Deltev Arendt (many thanks); these are currently my thoughts on this (insight from colleagues; missteps from me!)
First off pre-pandmic science travel was useful but often mad; flying for single meetings (sometimes in windowless rooms) with fast turn arounds. Not only was it carbon expensive but it was also bad for family life and just plain health.
As we enter yet another period of COVID uncertainity over outcomes (due mainly to human behaviour - what does "baseline/new normal" contacts look like in an European Autumn/Winter) a reminder about models. There are at least 3 different types; explanatory, forecast and scenario.
Explanatory - usually retrospective data to fit an understanding of the world (say infection->hospitalistion/not->death/discharge) for time series. Examples: excess deaths attributable to COVID, vaccine efficacy models and biological properties of variants.
Forecast - fit an up to date time series to understand outcomes in the near future, sometimes just to understand "now" (hence "nowcasting"). Examples: R rate and near time extrapolation; hospitalisation capacity near term management (often not public).