The divergence between Biobot and NWSS continues. NWSS at this point commands a far larger sampling pool than Biobot. Therefore, if we weight toward NWSS data:
🔸780,000 new infections/day
🔸1 in every 430 became infected today
🔸1 in every 43 people currently infected
% of ED visits and # hospitalized track NWSS well, but new admissions was flat last week (still much closer to NWSS). Normally all of these data sets have good agreement, but not today! Makes my job more difficult, for sure.
Biobot is the most anomalous in the Northeast. I absolutely don't believe that levels are highest there. Also I think they undersample the South.
NWSS and hosp metrics still show very high levels in the deep south. I'm starting to trust NWSS data more.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
It's apparently been 4 months since the first sample collection date, and it still hasnt been detected in any other country that does sequencing.
When Pirola first appeared, there were sequences spotted all over the world within a week or two of first detection.
2/
BA.2.86 already was as fast as the fastest variants out there, and the L455S mutation supercharged it to JN.1. This JN.1 background is going to be a very big hill to climb for a variant that hasn't managed a foothold outside of SA yet in a number of months. Pirola in SA:
Biobot had adjusted their last two weekly estimates down a bit. My Nov. 30th model missed the peak number by 0.6% 😅. Numbers still very high but dropping.
🔸1,270,000 new infections/day
🔸1 in every 26 Americans currently infected
In my opinion, 68% XBB is misleading. TODAY it's already less than 50% and dropping like a rock. People probably don't care what the situation was 3 weeks ago.
They want to know what's happening *now* and what is going to happen.
This is very simple to explain. The BA.2.86 descendent JN.1 is quickly outcompeting and displacing the XBB sublineages, and is pushing metrics upwards in many countries.
This is why we haven't changed Pirola's name for JN.1. This quick evolution was actually predicted by our team as part of Pirola. Even the exact site it needed (S:455) was predicted by members of this team (see @SolidEvidence quote in next tweet from September)
BA.2.86 was able to compete equally with any of the fastest lineages out there, even though it was still very weak against class 1 antibodies. Marc Johnson noted the 455 mutation would give Pirola its full potential, before it even evolved.
JN.1 will be the world's first experience with the Pirola tree.
It optimized quickly, just as we were concerned about. At the very start, we weren't certain exactly which piece it was missing, but by September it became clear it was Class 1 evasion.
I can help explain with models why trajectory changes "around 50% prevalence" from a growing escape variant/group and why it's a useful *rule of thumb*.
Plot it on a log chart. 40-60% is where the elbow is. Doesn't guarentee a wave, but a change in trajectory, absolutely.
The faster the growth, the *sharper* the elbow. Slower growth? Weak elbow. Multiple variants growing at different speeds? Multiple smaller elbows. JN.1 has enough growth to push numbers up in most countries.
If you say things like "See, JN.1 was already at 20% and no wave yet!", it shows a lack of understanding of the dynamics. There will be *some* effect by 20%, but the real impact will come later towards dominance.