Coronavirus

(The Guardian, June 14, 2020):

Scientists report flaws in WHO-funded study on 2-metre distancing -
Mistakes mean findings should not be used as evidence for relaxing rule,
say professors

Senior scientists have reported flaws in an influential World Health Organization-commissioned study into the risks of coronavirus infection and say it should not be used as evidence for relaxing the UK’s 2-metre physical distancing rule.

Critics of the distancing advice, which states that people should keep at least 2 metres apart, believe it is too cautious. They seized on the research commissioned by the WHO, which suggested a reduction from 2 metres to 1 would raise infection risk only marginally, from 1.3% to 2.6%.

But scientists who delved into the work found mistakes they believe undermine the findings to the point they cannot be relied upon when scientists and ministers are forming judgments about what constitutes safe physical distancing.

1 Like

(Ars Technica, June 16, 2020):

Mutation may be helping the coronavirus spread more readily -
A mutation that’s becoming common seems to boost infectivity in cultured cells.

.

(Scripps Research Institute, June 12, 2020):

Mutated coronavirus shows significant boost in infectivity -
COVID-19-causing viral variant taking over in the United States and Europe
now carries more functional, cell-binding spikes.

A tiny genetic mutation in the SARS coronavirus 2 variant circulating throughout Europe and the United States significantly increases the virus’ ability to infect cells, lab experiments performed at Scripps Research show.

“Viruses with this mutation were much more infectious than those without the mutation in the cell culture system we used,” says Scripps Research virologist Hyeryun Choe, PhD, senior author of the study. The mutation had the effect of markedly increasing the number of functional spikes on the viral surface, she adds. Those spikes are what allow the virus to bind to and infect cells. “The number - or density - of functional spikes on the virus is 4 or 5 times greater due to this mutation,” Choe says.

The spikes give the coronavirus its crown-like appearance and enable it to latch onto target cell receptors called ACE2. The mutation, called D614G, provides greater flexibility to the spike’s “backbone,” explains co-author Michael Farzan, PhD, co-chairman of the Scripps Research Department of Immunology and Microbiology. More flexible spikes allow newly made viral particles to navigate the journey from producer cell to target cell fully intact, with less tendency to fall apart prematurely, he explains. “Our data are very clear, the virus becomes much more stable with the mutation,” Choe says.

“There have been at least a dozen scientific papers talking about the predominance of this mutation,” Farzan says. “Are we just seeing a ‘founder effect?’ Our data nails it. It is not the founder effect.”

Choe and Farzan’s paper is titled “The D614G mutation in the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein reduces S1 shedding and increases infectivity.”

.

Some earlier comments and papers regarding SARS-CoV-2 Mutation D614G:

(May 12, 2020):

EXPERT COMMENTARY: ‘D614G’ mutation of SARS-CoV-2,
the virus that causes COVID-19

Two-thirds of the sequenced strains (or “isolates”) globally and half of the sequences in some countries (such as Australia and India) now have this D614G mutation, which is apparently increasing its representation among newer strains. … the D614G strain is only one of currently 10 strains circulating.

.

(AAAS, May 7, 2020):

Mutations in the Coronavirus Spike Protein

.

(May 5, 2020):

Global Spread of SARS-CoV-2 Subtype with Spike Protein Mutation D614G
is Shaped by Human Genomic Variations that Regulate Expression
of TMPRSS2 and MX1 Genes

SARS-CoV-2, particularly the 614G subtype, has spread more easily and with higher frequency to Europe and North America where the delC allele regulating expression of TMPRSS2 and MX1 host proteins is common, but not to East Asia where this allele is rare.

(PNAS, June 11, 2020):

Identifying airborne transmission as the dominant route
for the spread of COVID-19

We have elucidated the transmission pathways of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) by analyzing the trend and mitigation measures in the three epicenters. Our results show that the airborne transmission route is highly virulent and dominant for the spread of COVID-19. The mitigation measures are discernable from the trends of the pandemic. Our analysis reveals that the difference with and without mandated face covering represents the determinant in shaping the trends of the pandemic. This protective measure significantly reduces the number of infections. Other mitigation measures, such as social distancing implemented in the U.S., are insufficient by themselves in protecting the public.

The inadequate knowledge on virus transmission has inevitably hindered development of effective mitigation policies and resulted in unstoppable propagation of the COVID-19 pandemic (Figs. 13). In this work, we show that airborne transmission, particularly via nascent aerosols from human atomization, is highly virulent and represents the dominant route for the transmission of this disease. However, the importance of airborne transmission has not been considered in establishment of mitigation measures by government authorities (1, 20). Specifically, while the WHO and the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) have emphasized the prevention of contact transmission, both WHO and CDC have largely ignored the importance of the airborne transmission route (1, 20). The current mitigation measures, such as social distancing, quarantine, and isolation implemented in the United States, are insufficient by themselves in protecting the public. Our analysis reveals that the difference with and without mandated face covering represents the determinant in shaping the trends of the pandemic worldwide. We conclude that wearing of face masks in public corresponds to the most effective means to prevent interhuman transmission, and this inexpensive practice, in conjunction with extensive testing, quarantine, and contact tracking, poses the most probable fighting opportunity to stop the COVID-19 pandemic, prior to the development of a vaccine.

LOL WHAT ?? !!! I don’t think that’s going to DO what they CLAIM they “hope” it’s going to do. All I can say is LOL.

1 Like

“Do it for da children”, “Saaaaave da children” !!!

1 Like

Im glad all mine are out of school now… it’s become a joke.

1 Like

Yeah, there are a few trials with convalescent plasma - here are some:

Sort of looks like we have a safe-looking treatment, while we wait for a vaccine - but apparently lots to be done …

2 Likes

Isn’t that just for contact tracing? If one gets it, then it’s easier to identify who to test and/or quarantine …

1 Like

I think the idea is to be able to track outbreaks and spread - that type of tracing is probably best done on the ones most likely to spread it. I don’t think tracking the 65+ would do much, as most of them aren’t spreading the virus.

I agree, though - it’s a big step. It probably wouldn’t go in most of Europe - GDPR and stuff. And it should be voluntary, with a easy and short explanation as to the how, why, when etc. Also how the data is used and when it is deleted.

2 Likes
2 Likes

(Physics of Fluids, June 16, 2020):

On respiratory droplets and face masks

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

We computationally investigated the flow physics of respiratory droplets arising from coughing around and through a face mask. We considered a mask consisting of air-permeable filtering material made of porous fibrous layers. The fluid flow and cough dynamics significantly influence the droplet transmission and, in turn, the overall mask efficiency:

1. Without wearing a mask, droplets travel to about 70 cm.
2. Wearing a mask, the bulk of droplets will travel about half the distance.
3. However, in both cases, there are still isolated droplets transmitted beyond 70 cm.
4. Mask efficiency is dynamic (not constant). It is reduced during cough cycles. The fluid dynamics and the interactions between the droplets, the filter, and the face influence mask efficiency. We show that after ten cough cycles, efficiency can drop ∼8%. The above is a conservative prediction considering that we model a mild cough incident and ten cough cycles. We should expect more significant efficiency reduction for severe coughing events, as well as when wearing a mask for a longer period.
5. The dosage and time of exposure to a virus affecting a human are not known and will vary across subjects. We examined 10% and 32% of droplets, which are smaller than their corresponding initial size, and found that they reduce in number during cough cycles when wearing a mask.
6. The diameter of the transmitted droplets is larger across cough cycles when no mask is worn.
7. The accumulation of droplets in the surrounding environment increases as the cough continues and is more significant without a mask.
8. With a mask, droplet penetration approximately reaches a mean value. Without a mask, the rate of the droplet penetration increases with cough cycles and tends to decrease after several periods.
9. The mask to face fitting is important. Even in the case of a tight fitting scenario, if there exist some small openings, this can lead to additional leakage of droplets around the mask, which cannot be ignored. It contributes to an additional reduction in the mask efficiency with respect to efficiency reduction induced by the cyclic behavior of the coughing incident.
10. By wearing a mask, it will also provide greater protection to the wearer as it blocks the droplets expelled from another subject and further decelerates the incoming jet.
11. The complex droplet interactions and fluid physics lead to interesting phenomena such as hot spots downstream of the mask and flow recirculation associated with buoyancy.

According to the results of this study, we make the following recommendations:

1. Although masks will reduce droplet transmission, we should not ignore that several droplets will be transmitted away from the mask. The use of a mask will not provide complete prevention from airborne droplet transmission. The above is particularly important for both indoor and outdoor environments. As Dbouk and Drikakis 3 showed, respiratory droplets can be transmitted to several meters away from the subject due to wind conditions. Therefore, social distancing remains essential when facing an evolving pandemic.
2. The above recommendation implies that we can protect healthcare workers only if we equip them with a complete PPE, e.g., a helmet with a built-in air filter, a face shield together with a disposable suit over the whole ensemble, and a double set of gloves.
3. The manufacturers and regulatory authorities should consider new criteria for assessing mask performance to account for the flow physics and cough dynamics. We provided a simple criterion that takes into account efficiency reduction during a cyclic coughing incident.

.

(Physics of Fluids, May 19, 2020):

On coughing and airborne droplet transmission to humans

You don’t get tired of posting this stuff ad infinitum? :full_moon_with_face:

2 Likes

(medRxiv, June 9, 2020):

Dynamics of IgG seroconversion and pathophysiology of COVID:19 infections

(Scientific American, June 16, 2020):

A Visual Guide to the SARS-CoV-2 Coronavirus -
What scientists know about the inner workings of the pathogen
that has infected the world

.

(Scientific American, June 17, 2020):

Common Steroid Could Be Cheap and Effective Treatment
for Severe COVID-19

The Randomized Evaluation of COVID-19 Therapy (RECOVERY) trial involved 2,104 people hospitalized for the illness who were randomly assigned to receive the common corticosteroid drug dexamethasone. The medication is used to treat rheumatoid arthritis and other inflammatory conditions. A control group of 4,321 patients received only standard care. The drug reduced deaths by one third among patients on ventilators and by one fifth among those receiving oxygen therapy alone. It did not have any benefit for patients who did not need breathing support.

2 Likes

I actually read when I have time to sit down :wink:
Happy he can post things up, as I am slap busy lately, @anon70102222 :hugs:

1 Like

Good for you, @anon84779643!

1 Like

What’d I miss, something of value ?

(Johns Hopkins University, June 17, 2020):

WHY COVID-19 POSES GREATER RISKS FOR MEN THAN WOMEN -
Johns Hopkins biologist Sabra Klein discusses why men tend to be affected
more severely and require hospitalization from COVID-19

the male bias severity is happening across a diverse range of ages. A very large JAMA study on cases in New York City, for example, looked at ages 30 through 90, and found that males were significantly more likely to be hospitalized or die regardless of age. Another study in The Lancet examining ages 20 upwards in European countries also shows this trend across ages. What we’re seeing in ages 60 years and older is that this is where we find the most severe outcomes of death.

2 Likes

Nah, just ribbin’ our raven.

1 Like

Oh, hehe, carry on.

1 Like