Re: Omicron variant
Posted: November 26th, 2021, 8:59 pm
Did they explain why not "Xi"Hallucigenia wrote:WHO have officially named it omicron, they've not called it "nu" to avoid confusion when a new variant emerges that's not nu.
Shares, Investment and Personal Finance Discussion Forums
https://lemonfool.co.uk/
Did they explain why not "Xi"Hallucigenia wrote:WHO have officially named it omicron, they've not called it "nu" to avoid confusion when a new variant emerges that's not nu.
According to the CEO it's 6 weeks to adapt the vaccine, and 100 days before batches of new vaccine are produced.Julian wrote:Yes, it’s impressive. I saw that quote about the 100 days that was attributed to the Pfizer CEO but unfortunately it was the first few lines of an article behind a paywall so I couldn’t see more. I wonder how long each of the individual stages are which crudely I could break down into creating the new vaccine, getting the approval, and ramping up production of the new version. I did read somewhere that the first step could literally be done in a few days, it’s pretty much a case of deciding on the new coding sequence and substituting it into the already established manufacturing process. To create volume however I assume the existing manufacturing plants would need to go through some sort of very thorough sterilisation/purging process to make sure all traces of the previous vaccine were expunged so that they didn’t contaminate the new version. I suspect the approval process accounts for a very large part of that 100 day estimate.zico wrote:Pfizer have said it will take just 100 days to get a new vaccine tailored to the new variant with regulatory approval.
Aren't scientists amazing?
All governments need to do in the meantime is to take effective measures to delay the arrival and spread of the new variant.
- Julian
Would you care to expand on that? I would have thought that say a 50:50 mix of new and old vaccine would be perfectly fine (boost against delta and earlier at the same time as immunizing against omicron). On that basis a <1% "contamination" would be unnoticeable.Julian wrote:To create volume however I assume the existing manufacturing plants would need to go through some sort of very thorough sterilisation/purging process to make sure all traces of the previous vaccine were expunged so that they didn’t contaminate the new version.
- Julian
monabri wrote: "Prof Whitty said he was more concerned about the risks posed by existing variants, describing the delta epidemic as "undoubtedly the principal thing we need to concern ourselves with between now and Christmas".
In practice you’re right but as I understand it the regulatory authorities are very strict about the quality of the manufacturing process so if the approval is on the basis of it only delivering the revised mRNA coding sequence I suspect the plant would need to be able to demonstrate that there was no “contamination” from the previous vaccine production even if in this case, as you say, that “contamination” might actually be beneficial. Then again, maybe Pfizer will actively specify a “blend” for the revised approval which would lessen such problems.9873210 wrote:Would you care to expand on that? I would have thought that say a 50:50 mix of new and old vaccine would be perfectly fine (boost against delta and earlier at the same time as immunizing against omicron). On that basis a <1% "contamination" would be unnoticeable.Julian wrote:To create volume however I assume the existing manufacturing plants would need to go through some sort of very thorough sterilisation/purging process to make sure all traces of the previous vaccine were expunged so that they didn’t contaminate the new version.
- Julian
I'd expect the normal production protocols designed to keep stray chemicals, molds and other pathogens out of the vaccine would be way more than enough, so no special "deep clean" required. You don't want to be sloppy, but you're already a good deal better than not sloppy.
This isn't binary. He isn't saying nobody should be concerned about the new variant. Nor is he saying that beyond Christmas those risks, and responses to them, would be the same as in the period he specifically is referring to.9873210 wrote:monabri wrote: "Prof Whitty said he was more concerned about the risks posed by existing variants, describing the delta epidemic as "undoubtedly the principal thing we need to concern ourselves with between now and Christmas".
Good to know somebody is dealing with the long term planning.
(insert head banging against brick wall emoji)
Various modelling approaches (pre-Omicron) show the numbers are expected to go down a lot over the next few months.9873210 wrote:monabri wrote: "Prof Whitty said he was more concerned about the risks posed by existing variants, describing the delta epidemic as "undoubtedly the principal thing we need to concern ourselves with between now and Christmas".
Good to know somebody is dealing with the long term planning.
(insert head banging against brick wall emoji)
It's certainly possible it is already here. But to paint a more accurate picture it is 61 people on 2 flights, and the destination of the flights, where the resulting tests occurred, were to the Netherlands, not here.zico wrote:Various modelling approaches (pre-Omicron) show the numbers are expected to go down a lot over the next few months.9873210 wrote:
Good to know somebody is dealing with the long term planning.
(insert head banging against brick wall emoji)
Two ways to use this information
1. We don't need to do anything because we'll only have 150 deaths per day for a few weeks.
2. We only need to reintroduce masks for 2-3 weeks to prevent at least 50% of those 150 deaths per day.
(With Omicron around, obvious we snowflake option 2 - but willwe?)
A KLM flight from Johannesburg has had all its passengers tested and 60 were positive (though most may have Delta). Given that UK hasn't tested South. Africa inbound flights in last few days, it's almost certain the Omicron variants already here.
It does make a mockery of the pre-flight testing notion. I heard there were 650 people on those flights so that's a one in ten chance you have of sitting next to someone with Covid.zico wrote:A KLM flight from Johannesburg has had all its passengers tested and 60 were positive ...
How does that work in practice? Stop the leg of the flight from leaving Amsterdam to Manchester? What then stops people travelling to the UK on other flights?88V8 wrote:It does make a mockery of the pre-flight testing notion. I heard there were 650 people on those flights so that's a one in ten chance you have of sitting next to someone with Covid.zico wrote:A KLM flight from Johannesburg has had all its passengers tested and 60 were positive ...
If we were serious about stopping/delaying the Africa's arrival, we should have turned around the flights that were already in the air... although I do agree, it's already here.
V8
I'd go further and say it is probable that it is already here.dealtn wrote: It's certainly possible it is already here. But to paint a more accurate picture it is 61 people on 2 flights, and the destination of the flights, where the resulting tests occurred, were to the Netherlands, not here.
It's been done before. 20 years, 2 months, and 16 days ago. An that was 'only' about 5500 deaths.dealtn wrote:88V8 wrote: How does that work in practice?
There are (were?) 5 direct flights per day from Johannesburg to uk, so making the reasonable assumption that over the last few days there'll have been 60 positive Covid cases per flight (as with KLM) that means 300 South-Africa Covid cases arriving here per day, and freely mixing with UK citizens. Even If just 10% of these are Omicron, that's still enough to spread the new variant here. Of course, we could trace/test and isolate all threatened arrivals (probably just a few thousand) because we've spent £37 billion on a system to do just that, so maybe it'll all be fine.dealtn wrote:It's certainly possible it is already here. But to paint a more accurate picture it is 61 people on 2 flights, and the destination of the flights, where the resulting tests occurred, were to the Netherlands, not here.zico wrote: Various modelling approaches (pre-Omicron) show the numbers are expected to go down a lot over the next few months.
Two ways to use this information
1. We don't need to do anything because we'll only have 150 deaths per day for a few weeks.
2. We only need to reintroduce masks for 2-3 weeks to prevent at least 50% of those 150 deaths per day.
(With Omicron around, obvious we snowflake option 2 - but willwe?)
A KLM flight from Johannesburg has had all its passengers tested and 60 were positive (though most may have Delta). Given that UK hasn't tested South. Africa inbound flights in last few days, it's almost certain the Omicron variants already here.
I haven't worked on Covid vaccine production, but I have experience of flu vaccine manufacturing. The vaccines are made by batch production and all equipment is specially designed firstly to minimise residual contamination in equipment and secondary equipment is typically fitted with "clean in place" or "steam in place" systems to ensure no cross contamination between batches. Furthermore, I can only reference flu vaccine experience, but exposure to temperature of more than 60degc for a short period of time (I forget the number) is all that's required to kill 100% of remaining flu virus in equipment. To be honest, I think everyone can be very relaxed about the quality of typical vaccine manufacturing.9873210 wrote:Would you care to expand on that? I would have thought that say a 50:50 mix of new and old vaccine would be perfectly fine (boost against delta and earlier at the same time as immunizing against omicron). On that basis a <1% "contamination" would be unnoticeable.Julian wrote:To create volume however I assume the existing manufacturing plants would need to go through some sort of very thorough sterilisation/purging process to make sure all traces of the previous vaccine were expunged so that they didn’t contaminate the new version.
- Julian
I'd expect the normal production protocols designed to keep stray chemicals, molds and other pathogens out of the vaccine would be way more than enough, so no special "deep clean" required. You don't want to be sloppy, but you're already a good deal better than not sloppy.
Naive in the extreme to believe it hadn't. Very happy to see that the authorities are quick to tighten up on incoming travelers this time around. Buys time to get more people vaccinated or boosted up and more time to assess I the vaccines need tweaking in response.