Rise of 'Alarming' Subvariants

[George K]

Rise of 'Alarming' Subvariants of COVID 'Worrisome' for Winter

The BQ.1, BQ1.1, XBB, and XBB.1 subvariants are the most resistant to neutralizing antibodies, researcher Qian Wang, PhD, and colleagues report. This means you have no or "markedly reduced" protection against infection from these four strains, even if you've already had COVID-19 or are vaccinated and boosted multiple times, including with a bivalent vaccine.

On top of that, all available monoclonal antibody treatments are mostly or completely ineffective against these subvariants.

What does that mean for our immediate future? The findings are definitely "worrisome," said Eric Topol, MD, founder and director of the Scripps Translational Research Institute in La Jolla, California, and editor-in-chief of Medscape.

But evidence from other countries, specifically Singapore and France, show that at least two of these variants turned out not to be as damaging as expected, likely because of high numbers of people vaccinated or who survived pervious infections, he said.

Still, there is little to celebrate in the new findings, except that COVID-19 vaccinations and prior infections can still reduce the risk for serious outcomes such as hospitalization and death, the researchers write.

In fact, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) data released Friday shows that people who have received four shots of the original COVID-19 vaccines as well as the bivalent booster were 57% less likely to visit an urgent care clinic or emergency room, regardless of age.

The "Alarming antibody evasion properties of rising SARS-CoV-2 BQ and XBB subvariants" study was published online this week in the journal Cell.

It comes at a time when BQ.1 and BQ.1.1 account for about 70% of the circulating variants, data show. In addition, hospitalizations are up 18% over the past 2 weeks and COVID-19 deaths are up 50% nationwide, The New York Times reports.

Globally, in many places, an "immunity wall" that has been built, Topol said. That may not be the case in the United States.

[Mik]

Well just doublefuck.

[Jolly]

Focus on the treatments.

[LuFins Dad]

Paragraph 1 and 2 are all about how the vaccines, prior infection, and monoclonal antibodies offer no or extremely low protection.

Paragraphs 4 and 5 state that serious cases and hospitalizations are low and then they speculate that it’s likely due to vaccines and prior infections….

[Mik]

Yeah, I noticed that.

[jon-nyc]

@Jolly said in Rise of 'Alarming' Subvariants:

Focus on the treatments.

Ivermectin or hydroxychloroquine?

[LuFins Dad]

Here’s an idea, why don’t we recommend that everybody lose 10-15 pounds if appropriate and make sure they have sufficient Vitamin D levels?

[Jolly]

Ivermectin or hydroxychloroquine?

In their time, yes.

Medicine is an art, practiced sometimes without the benefit of hard science. Hard science does not dictate the skill of a surgeon's hands. It does not always predict what works and does not.

That little blue pill you take, is a result of blood pressure research.

Serendipity is alive and well in Medicine. Sometimes, you have to throw things at the wall until they stick, especially when you have little or no treatment regiments.

At this time, we have a few things that docs can agree on. There are also other treatment regimens that docs will differ on, such as steroid use and how much. One thing docs do agree on that works, is monoclonal antibody treatments...Why don't we focus on having some available? Why don't we take a look at a polyclonal antibody blend? We did a very good job on HIV retroviral cocktails, can we do the same for COVID?

[Jolly]

@LuFins-Dad said in Rise of 'Alarming' Subvariants:

Here’s an idea, why don’t we recommend that everybody lose 10-15 pounds if appropriate and make sure they have sufficient Vitamin D levels?

Ain't no money in it.