Science/Environment Wuhan Coronavirus (COVID-19) - Pandemic Declared

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
What were the figures Scotty from Marketing was throwing up in his presser

Something about infection rates dropping from 25% to 13%

Edit: Now Hunt is using the same figure....wtf am I missing here?

he's referring to the growth rate (new cases as a %age of total accumulative cases), and he is right that specific %age reduced as we had no increase in the daily number (so it reduced as a %age)

as you can see, growth plateaued in recent days (except for yesterday)

1585441295347.png
 
I would like to see the sources of the experts rather than just that site. An overreaction or the wrong strategy?

But the suggestion of getting the young to mix is not a new one.

If all young people exhibited only mild symptoms or were asymptomatic, then no young person would die or go to ICU if people were encouraged to mix. Some experts are assuming that “if” is true.
Not only that, enough young people would quickly get immunity from the disease so that the disease would not spread in the community and would peter out.

It makes sense, and would lead to lasting protection of society from the disease: you wouldn’t have to control your borders because your country is okay. The problems that China and Korea have now are protecting themselves from reinfection as people return from other countries.

The problems with this are what to do with the vulnerable: the old, the asthmatics, those with compromised immune systems?
If your moral code allows it, that’s not a problem. They are isolated until this all goes away (this will take less time anyway than when trying to suppress the outbreak), or they are likely to die. But who looks after them if the contagion is everywhere?

Is the assumption that young people are safe from CoVid-19 accurate, or is having a lower level of risk acceptable?

If schools were kept open specifically to spread the virus among younger members of the community (remember Morrison telling everyone to send their kids to school to keep the economy going), what of the older members of the community - the school teachers and the grandparents who were more exposed as a result?

And what of the medical practitioners who have to treat the infected population?


This article by epidemiologists paints the choice of flattening the curve versus protecting everyone. Achieving herd immunity would mean that at least 60% of the population have caught the disease (and recovered, hopefully). That would be disastrous if it is across all ages, but much better if it is 90% of people under 40 and 10% of people over 40, for example.

The article was published a week ago, so is not too out of date with its figures and assumptions. Since then, schools have largely closed or been emptied. Their work as spreading stations is done, or now that community contagion is common, schools get too many people together? There has been no testing of communities except those entering the country and falling sick as a result of that, so its hard to answer the question.

Just to add; isn’t there an assumption here that once a person recovers from cv19 they are not infectious? Do we really know that for sure?

the ideal end of this is everyone is either recovered and not infectious, or never had it because they are protected. Practically there will be a small group which is infectious; how mobile will this group be? Many of them will be international travellers. Do you decide it’s cheaper for society to isolate this group not the uninflected? How do you know who they are?

it’s all management till an vaccine comes, and then forced usage even the anti vaxxers(a social battle still to come)

therefore the endgame is management, so official strategy for fast herd immunisation can not work.

and the article demands governments declare their strategy: they actually can’t till the unknowns are known.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

What were the figures Scotty from Marketing was throwing up in his presser

Something about infection rates dropping from 25% to 13%

Edit: Now Hunt is using the same figure....wtf am I missing here?

As far as I'm aware its still almost impossible to get tested unless you meet the criteria?

That would skew data massively.
 
Very optimistic to read a plateau in that graph. Did Hunt qualify his statements?

Cool the jets there mate.

There's a crossover period between international arrivals/isolation and locally acquired infections.

It's an encouraging outline, but as hamohawk stated, it's a bit too early to call any definite trending.

not saying i agree with it, im saying where he got his claim from

personally I 100% agree you need more than 3 days data to declare a trend
 
We would have done better if there were fewer mixed messages. One of two options:

We are an island, so could have been more rigorous in stopping the virus getting in and spreading with contact tracing and enforced isolation of returning travellers.

OR,

We could have aimed for herd immunity by isolating the old and sick people and telling them why, and asking all others to respect that isolation, but carry on as normal otherwise. Any older or unwell teachers should have been isolated from the contagion factories that are schools. Kids living with old people should have been isolated. Neither should have been given a choice in this. Old people should not have been allowed in supermarkets panic buying along with a heap of infected people. They should have been offered priority delivery from the outset.
The rationale for this should have been explained to the population, not as an economic justification but a health one.

I suggested your second scenario which was met with howls of derision, ..... it would not be hard to up the ante at RV's or aged homes they have reasonably strict protocols in place already.

They do it already for the flu or stomach bugs etc

i do plenty of work around this sector and have noticed there is not a huge amount of older people living directly with family, some have granny flats out the back but not many directly.
 
Just to add; isn’t there an assumption here that once a person recovers from cv19 they are not infectious? Do we really know that for sure?

the ideal end of this is everyone is either recovered and not infectious, or never had it because they are protected. Practically there will be a small group which is infectious; how mobile will this group be? Many of them will be international travellers. Do you decide it’s cheaper for society to isolate this group not the uninflected? How do you know who they are?

it’s all management till an vaccine comes, and then forced usage even the anti vaxxers(a social battle still to come)

therefore the endgame is management, so official strategy for fast herd immunisation can not work.

and the article demands governments declare their strategy: they actually can’t till the unknowns are known.

If a person makes antibodies to the virus, particularly the S spike the virus uses to get into the cell, we can be pretty sure the person is immune to it reinfecting them. After all, that’s exactly what the vaccine will provide.

But if the virus does cross the blood brain barrier (it probably does), it could conceivably hide out in neurons in the same way that the chicken pox virus does. And down the track, all of the herd that is immune could face another disease in the same way that people who once had chicken pox gets shingles without catching it. Who knows how that turns out - the zombie apocalypse, perhaps?
 
Nope. I haven't looked in to it at any great depth other than scanning over the S spike/ACE-2 affinity.

If you have/find something, then please post it. :thumbsu:

I found this.


The virus binds to host cells through its trimeric spike glycoprotein, making this protein a key target for potential therapies and diagnostics. Wrapp et al. determined a 3.5-angstrom-resolution structure of the 2019-nCoV trimeric spike protein by cryo–electron microscopy. Using biophysical assays, the authors show that this protein binds at least 10 times more tightly than the corresponding spike protein of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)–CoV to their common host cell receptor.

This means it's easier to pass from human to human.

Also this part was interesting and maybe the reason why it's more contagious as it can bind to Furin proteins more easily.

2019-nCoV S shares 98% sequence identity with the S protein from the bat coronavirus RaTG13, with the most notable variation arising from an insertion in the S1/S2 protease cleavage site that results in an “RRAR” furin recognition site in 2019-nCoV (19) rather than the single arginine in SARS-CoV (fig. S5) (20–23). Notably, amino acid insertions that create a polybasic furin site in a related position in hemagglutinin proteins are often found in highly virulent avian and human influenza viruses.
 
There's an interesting molecular genetics modelling paper in that thread, which basically blows away the conspiracy theories.

The genetic evolution of S protein spikes (genotype D).

As you can see the predominant jumps occurred around 2007-2009.

View attachment 848742
View attachment 848743
View attachment 848744

This phylogenic tree highlights 2007 (L195S and Y521H) and 2009 (T93K, D120H and K184N) "bottle necks" in the viral evolution of genotype D spike proteins:

View attachment 848746

View attachment 848749

To add to that we still have not found a vaccine for SARS and I believe coronavirus have one of the highest mutation rates for all class of viruses.

I think it's fanciful thinking will get a vaccine in a year.
 
I found this.


The virus binds to host cells through its trimeric spike glycoprotein, making this protein a key target for potential therapies and diagnostics. Wrapp et al. determined a 3.5-angstrom-resolution structure of the 2019-nCoV trimeric spike protein by cryo–electron microscopy. Using biophysical assays, the authors show that this protein binds at least 10 times more tightly than the corresponding spike protein of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)–CoV to their common host cell receptor.

This means it's easier to pass from human to human.

Also this part was interesting and maybe the reason why it's more contagious as it can bind to Furin proteins more easily.


Cheers, I am informed on the affinity related stuff. :thumbsu:

2019-nCoV S shares 98% sequence identity with the S protein from the bat coronavirus RaTG13, with the most notable variation arising from an insertion in the S1/S2 protease cleavage site that results in an “RRAR” furin recognition site in 2019-nCoV (19) rather than the single arginine in SARS-CoV (fig. S5) (20–23). Notably, amino acid insertions that create a polybasic furin site in a related position in hemagglutinin proteins are often found in highly virulent avian and human influenza viruses.

15 functional genes and then this happens before the thing shifts mutation again. What are the odds?

Thanks, I will give it a close read.
 
Last edited:

(Log in to remove this ad.)

In what regard ?.

Seemingly discounting the impact of community transmission, noting testing has primarily been restricted to international arrivals/ people interacting with these people. It's important to note there was over 2 months of free travel in/out of the country whilst this was still going.
 
We still have not found a vaccine for SARS and I believe coronavirus have one of the highest mutation rates of all class of viruses.

Let's ******* hope so!!!!

I think it's fanciful thinking will get a vaccine in a year.

Hang on mate, aren't you confusing mutation with increased or capable affinity? Typically a genetic mutation will either delete or weaken the process.

I suppose it all comes down to the numbers and how any mutation is treated upon detection, but if a vaccine fro Covid19 has passed phase III trials and is on the market, then I suspect that it will only require a very quick turnaround to modify the spike protein antigen sequence, and quickly negate any new viral mutations.

Without that S protein, I don't think it causes much bother.
 
Cheers, I am informed on the affinity related stuff. :thumbsu:



15 functional genes and then this happens before the thing shifts mutation again. What are the odds?

Thanks, I will give it a close read.

The affinity related stuff is not for you it's for the general board.

We can speculate the odds but it's probably for naught. Maybe it never jumped from the wet markets in December last year; it could indicate it may have been in the population for a very long time before detection.
 
Let's ******* hope so!!!!



Hang on mate, aren't you confusing mutation with increased or capable affinity? Typically a genetic mutation will either delete or weaken the process.

I suppose it all comes down to the numbers and how any mutation is treated upon detection, but if a vaccine fro Covid19 has passed phase III trials and is on the market, then I suspect that it will only require a very quick turnaround to modify the spike protein antigen sequence, and quickly negate any new viral mutations.

Without that S protein, I don't think it causes much bother.

Fair enough.
 
Let's ******* hope so!!!!



Hang on mate, aren't you confusing mutation with increased or capable affinity? Typically a genetic mutation will either delete or weaken the process.

I suppose it all comes down to the numbers and how any mutation is treated upon detection, but if a vaccine fro Covid19 has passed phase III trials and is on the market, then I suspect that it will only require a very quick turnaround to modify the spike protein antigen sequence, and quickly negate any new viral mutations.

Without that S protein, I don't think it causes much bother.

But if the virus mutates a lot, the viruses that don’t work will be weeded out and the more virulent ones will take over.
The likelihood is that viruses work better for themselves and aren’t stopped by our vaccine.
We would have to create new vaccines every year, just like the flu, and every year we would miss some of the mutations.
A high rate of mutation would be a terrible outcome.
 
Morrison about to announce a 1.2 billion dollar mental health package to combat this.,

Think they get the feeling that the cure is possibly worse than the disease but they were somewhat caught up in the hysteria and could not win any other way to be re-elected?.
 
Seemingly discounting the impact of community transmission, noting testing has primarily been restricted to international arrivals/ people interacting with these people. It's important to note there was over 2 months of free travel in/out of the country whilst this was still going.

this has to change, esp in NSW and VIC. this data from Vic Govt has about a third of our cases now being community transmission (was around 20-25% just two days ago)

 
Think they get the feeling that the cure is possibly worse than the disease but they were somewhat caught up in the hysteria and could not win any other way to be re-elected?.
As a country if we keep the fatality rate in check, and come out of it financially strong because of the measures in place, and that includes the rumoured 85% guaranteed wage subsidy to be anounced in a day or two, then it will be a no brainer he will be re elected.
 
If a person makes antibodies to the virus, particularly the S spike the virus uses to get into the cell, we can be pretty sure the person is immune to it reinfecting them. After all, that’s exactly what the vaccine will provide.

But if the virus does cross the blood brain barrier (it probably does), it could conceivably hide out in neurons in the same way that the chicken pox virus does. And down the track, all of the herd that is immune could face another disease in the same way that people who once had chicken pox gets shingles without catching it. Who knows how that turns out - the zombie apocalypse, perhaps?

im saying even if your population was conveniently either recovered people or non infected at all (presumably the old sand weakened people we seem to have been so far fairly successful in protecting) that is no people currentlysuffering the disease in the infectious phase

do the non infected people have nothing to fear from the recovered people? Do we know that for sure in this pandemic? Seems to be quite a few basing whole strategies on this.
I know it seems like immunology 101, but can we really take it as given until it’s corroborated by actual data and testing?
 
Last edited:
As a country if we keep the fatality rate in check, and come out of it financially strong because of the measures in place, and that includes the rumoured 85% guaranteed wage subsidy to be anounced in a day or two, then it will be a no brainer he will be re elected.

If the ICUs are not overwhelmed, and the death rate of medical and education staff is low, and the economy starts to bounce back a bit, I agree - Morrison will deserve plaudits.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top