Bad news about the new UK variant

[Copper]

He's making it up as he goes along

Based on the political winds

It's amazing that anyone at all is wearing a mask or staying home

At this point I think Karen has more influence on mask wearers than Mr. Fauci

[jon-nyc]

Found it in San Diego too.

Neither the CA nor CO cases were people who had traveled.

So it’s in the community, probably all over. We just haven’t looked enough yet

[jon-nyc]

Florida, also guy with no travel history.

[George K]

Evidence is that it's no more deadly than the other strains. But, if it's more infectious, that's not a good thing, to be sure.

[jon-nyc]

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jan/01/now-coronavirus-variant-us-since-october

[Loki]

I definitely recall several months ago several articles that discussed a more infectious strain. I took interest in it wondering if it had a different mortality rate. Then, it disappeared from the news and now is back with a vengeance.

I agree it’s likely widespread by now.

[jon-nyc]

@george-k said in Bad news about the new UK variant:

Evidence is that it's no more deadly than the other strains. But, if it's more infectious, that's not a good thing, to be sure.

Bach posted about a model showing that 50% higher R0 would result in more deaths than a 50% increase in IFR.

Makes sense, since death rate is linear and R0 is exponential.

[bachophile]

@jon-nyc https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2020/12/virus-mutation-catastrophe/617531/

To understand the difference between exponential and linear risks, consider an example put forth by Adam Kucharski, a professor at the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine who focuses on mathematical analyses of infectious-disease outbreaks. Kucharski compares a 50 percent increase in virus lethality to a 50 percent increase in virus transmissibility. Take a virus reproduction rate of about 1.1 and an infection fatality risk of 0.8 percent and imagine 10,000 active infections—a plausible scenario for many European cities, as Kucharski notes. As things stand, with those numbers, we’d expect 129 deaths in a month. If the fatality rate increased by 50 percent, that would lead to 193 deaths. In contrast, a 50 percent increase in transmissibility would lead to a whopping 978 deaths in just one month—assuming, in both scenarios, a six-day infection-generation time.

[Renauda]

Just came across this article about a mutation found in South Africa:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/health/covid-19-vaccine-south-africa-variant-1.5860585

Anyone have more details?

[jon-nyc]

Funny my son mentioned it last night. I meant to look it up today.

[Renauda]

There seem to be a lot of media articles, but all seem for general public consumption.

[Jolly]

Viruses gotta virus.

What did y'all expect?

[Renauda]

It's a given that it would mutate. No surprise. Why do you ask?

[Horace]

We all host mutations every day. Viruses are so small though, a mutation can change them drastically.

[Jolly]

I didn't ask. It's a rhetorical device pointing out the obvious...

[Renauda]

Oh, I see.

[LuFins Dad]

It's fighting back!

[jon-nyc]

Joy.

[George K]

@jon-nyc I saw that earlier.

I wonder if it's transmission from an outside source or more "evolution" of the virus.

[Copper]

When those War of the Worlds Martians get here we'll have plenty of ammo