Bad news about the new UK variant
-
wrote on 31 Dec 2020, 01:54 last edited by
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
-
wrote on 1 Jan 2021, 04:02 last edited by
Florida, also guy with no travel history.
-
wrote on 1 Jan 2021, 12:59 last edited by
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.
-
wrote on 1 Jan 2021, 14:09 last edited by
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.
-
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.
wrote on 1 Jan 2021, 14:16 last edited by@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.
-
@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.
wrote on 2 Jan 2021, 06:06 last edited by@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.
-
wrote on 4 Jan 2021, 18:06 last edited by
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?
-
wrote on 4 Jan 2021, 18:08 last edited by
Funny my son mentioned it last night. I meant to look it up today.
-
wrote on 4 Jan 2021, 18:11 last edited by
There seem to be a lot of media articles, but all seem for general public consumption.
-
wrote on 4 Jan 2021, 18:15 last edited by
Viruses gotta virus.
What did y'all expect?
-
wrote on 4 Jan 2021, 18:17 last edited by Renauda 1 Apr 2021, 18:17
It's a given that it would mutate. No surprise. Why do you ask?
-
wrote on 4 Jan 2021, 18:20 last edited by
We all host mutations every day. Viruses are so small though, a mutation can change them drastically.
-
wrote on 4 Jan 2021, 18:21 last edited by
I didn't ask. It's a rhetorical device pointing out the obvious...
-
wrote on 4 Jan 2021, 18:27 last edited by
Oh, I see.
-
wrote on 4 Jan 2021, 21:50 last edited by
It's fighting back!
-
wrote on 4 Jan 2021, 22:29 last edited by
-
wrote on 4 Jan 2021, 23:02 last edited by
When those War of the Worlds Martians get here we'll have plenty of ammo