Experts: Herd Immunity Redundant in Face of Israel's COVID Vaccination Drive

 

Source: Haaretz

March 27 2021

By Ido Efrati

Models show that a 55 percent vaccination rate is enough to open the economy and

for the pandemic to subside.

As Israel's vaccination drive rolls out, the concept of "herd immunity" is making headlines again, but is it possible in Israel, or even necessary? "

The once-popular idea that enough people will eventually gain immunity to SARS-CoV-2 to block most transmission — a ‘herd-immunity threshold’ — is starting to look unlikely, ” an article in the science journal Nature argued last week. 

Entitled “Five reasons why COVID herd immunity is probably impossible, " the article consists of a series of interviews with experts and challenges the concept of herd immunity – a situation in which a large part of the population becomes immune to the virus, which signicantly limits its spread. 

We’re moving away from the idea that we’ll hit the herdimmunity threshold and then the pandemic will go away for good, ” says epidemiologist Lauren Ancel Meyers, executive director of the University of Texas at Austin COVID-19 Modeling Consortium. 

“The vaccine will mean that the virus will start to dissipate on its own, ” Meyers says. But as new strains emerge and immunity from infections potentially dwindles, “we may nd ourselves months or a year down the road still battling the threat, and having to deal with future surges." 

Israeli experts, however, wonder if herd immunity is even necessary in order to return to normal life. 

Too many factors prevent Israel from attaining herd immunity says Jonathan Gershoni, a virologist from Tel Aviv University. "But the attainability of herd immunity is neither important nor relevant. We should focus on whether the current conditions and some reasonable eorts would be sucient to gain control of the pandemic and lead normal life." 

A vaccination center in Tel Aviv, last week Credit: Hadas Parush Israel’s election results: The pain of the Covid aftermath economy 

While the goal of vaccinating as many people as possible is important, Gershoni thinks Israel should direct its eorts on what he calls “pragmatic” protection. “

We know that coronavirus morbidity in children and teens is less severe and many who are infected don't suer symptoms." If this was the case for the entire population, Israel could operate normally. So, "if theoretically everyone over 40 was vaccinated, we would reach immunity of about 50 percent. While it is still far from herd immunity (herd immunity is reached at 70-80 percent), it protects the atrisk population, ” Gershoni adds. 

Prof. Ran Balicer, a professor of public health and chief innovation ocer at Clalit Health Services and a member of the national Epidemic Management Team, suggests we use the term "indirect protection." 

Indirect protection means that the unvaccinated population is safeguarded because vaccinations and restrictions impede the spread of the virus. "Even without reaching herd immunity, the more the number of daily conrmed cases goes down, the bigger eect it would have on indirect protection. When 60 percent of the population is vaccinated, it's enough for the infection rate to go down. This in addition to wearing masks and social distancing are enough to curb infection rates and reopen the economy, " Balicer said. 

According to Balicer, the eects of indirect protection, which are still felt in Israel, have allowed a cautious return to normal. What Israel experiences is not a weakening of the virus but the eects of a vaccination drive which limits its spreading potential. Indirect protection builds up gradually, "we see a dramatic decline in infections within communities, which has high vaccination rates, and we anticipate that this will gradually expand, " he added.

Wiping out the virus 

Dvir Aran, the principal investigator of a biomedical data science lab at the Technion, offers a different perspective on the population's immunity rate. 

Aran, who develops machine-learning models to improve clinical decision-making, emphasized two parameters that are signicant for predictive COVID-19 models. The first measures the rate of reproduction (R number), which signies to the number of people each coronavirus patient Jerusalem, this month infects on average without any means of protection. The second measures how effective vaccinations are in reducing infection levels among vaccinated people. 

With these parameters we can build the models necessary to understand what "percentage of the population (is) protected from the virus, ” Aran says. 

When the pandemic broke and Israel had no restrictions in placed the R number varied between 2 and 3, Aran says. And when the British variant arrived in Israel, before it had implemented restrictions and had no vaccines, "the R number uctuated between 4 and 5, ” he says. 

However, "according to Aran's models, if the vaccines reduce the level of infection by 90 percent, it’s enough for Israel to vaccinate only 55 percent of its population to lower the R number below 1." 

When the R number drops below one, the number of new infections decreases and the pandemic fades.

Currently, the R number is at 0.6, Aran says. He believes that “even if people would stop wearing masks and would go back to soccer stadiums, the R number will rise up to 0.8 percent at most." 

This scenario, however, can change if a new COVID-19 strain which has a higher infection rate and is resistant to the vaccines we are using. A scenario Aran thinks isn't "very likely.”

More than 50 percent vaccinated 

Figures published on Wednesday by the Israeli Health Ministry show that 4,649,654 people are fully vaccinated against COVID-19. 

In practice that means that more than half of Israel’s population has received the second shot of COVID- vaccine. Alongside them, some 550,000 Israelis have received the rst dose, but have yet received the second. 

Although the vaccination rates are expected to limit the spread of the virus, we should not fool ourselves to think that the pandemic is over. Gershoni reminds us that viruses like polio or measles still exist even though a vaccine was found long ago. 

“These viruses exist. We can still see outbreaks of measles occur from time to time, in places where vaccination rates decline below a certain level and protection is impaired, " he adds. 

While Israel is focused on leading the world with its vaccination drive, "there’s an illusion here, ” says Gershoni. “Mainly because the problem the pandemic poses in Israel doesn’t stop at its borders. As long as the virus is raging among our neighbors in Gaza, Lebanon, Syria, Jordan and Egypt, we won’t be protected, ” he says. 

Pfizer decision to turn off temperature sensors forced scramble to ensure Covid-19 vaccines kept ultra-cold

 

Source: STAT

By Olivia Coldhill

Dec 17 2020

A last-minute snafu this fall threatened to disrupt the smooth rollout of the first Covid-19 vaccine approved in the United States, according to industry officials.

At issue was how to monitor the temperature of the ultra-cold storage containers being used to distribute vials of the vaccine developed by Pfizer and its partner BioNTech. Pfizer, the officials told STAT, planned to disconnect temperature-monitoring sensors on the containers once they were delivered to health care providers — though many of the providers needed to use the boxes to store the vials for up to 30 days. Without the monitoring systems, providers would have no way of knowing if the vials had thawed prematurely, rendering the vaccine unusable.

In the end, the U.S. government’s Operation Warp Speed scrambled to address the problem, signing a $25 million deal in mid-November with Controlant Global, an Icelandic company that created the proprietary temperature-monitoring platform for all Pfizer’s shipping containers. Under this agreement, Pfizer will discontinue its temperature monitoring once the boxes arrive at their destination, and the federal government will simultaneously turn the system back on.

Still, the episode highlights how, in the frenzy to get a vaccine to the public, details crucial to its distribution were overlooked until late in the game. And it reflects how, despite efforts to protect vaccine makers from liability, legal concerns are shaping their actions. Experts said concerns over legal action, as well as bad publicity if vaccine doses were lost to thawing after delivery, likely drove Pfizer’s thinking.

Pfizer is shipping its vaccines in special containers packed in dry ice to keep them at the required minus-70 degrees Celsius. As few freezers get that cold, many health systems are using these containers to store the vaccines after they arrive. Premier, a group purchaser for U.S. hospitals, said that it asked Pfizer in November to reconsider its decision to disconnect the sensors, and that for weeks, health care providers sought to clarify whether they would need to purchase their own temperature sensors.

“These vaccines need to be maintained at a specific temperature to ensure they stay viable. When holding vaccines in a cooler and refreshing with dry ice, it’s hard to know if you’re maintaining the temperature,” said Jessica Daley, vice president of strategic supplier engagement at Premier.

It’s fairly unusual for temperature-monitoring devices to go to ultra-low temperatures, and Daley said there weren’t enough alternatives available to replace those that Pfizer turned off. It was only in early December that Premier and providers learned that Operation Warp Speed (OWS) had resolved the problem, said Premier’s director of advocacy, Soumi Saha.

Neither Pfizer, Controlant, nor the Trump administration would explain exactly how the monitoring handoff works. “Pfizer will de-activate the temperature monitor on their shipping container once they are delivered. Operation Warp Speed contracted with the manufacturer of the device to immediately re-activate it with no loss of temperature monitoring and no loss of data,” Natalie Baldassarre, a spokeswoman for the Department of Health and Human Services, said in a statement.

The contract makes clear that OWS had little choice but to pick up responsibility. “As Pfizer will only monitor the temperature through transportation and up to Government acceptance, the Government requires the ability to monitor the vaccine … until the vaccine has been utilized and the shipping containers returned to Pfizer,” reads the contract.

Operation Warp Speed only started market research into temperature-monitoring for the boxes on Nov. 9, according to the Controlant agreement, though the government signed a $1.95 billion contract with Pfizer to provide 100 million doses of the vaccine in July.

The late-stage contract with Controlant suggests that this issue wasn’t fully thought through when the U.S. government signed the contract with Pfizer, said Ameet Sarpatwari, assistant professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School.

“Somewhere the ball got dropped,” he said. “Instead of turning off [the monitoring system], turning back on, it could have just been a continuous process. From a safety standpoint, that seems to be a better way to go.”

He said the original contract with Pfizer could have left room for discussions over who would have oversight of maintaining the ultra-cold temperatures. “A bit more of a systematic process that included transparency could have secured input from others that would have shown some details were insufficient with this contract,” said Sarpatwari. “Rather than being forced upon us, it could have been a decision of how we want to allocate that burden.”

Pfizer did not respond to requests to explain why it decided to disconnect the remote temperature monitoring devices. The company “is working very closely with Operation Warp Speed (OWS) on ensuring a temperature monitoring solution for points of uses if our thermal shipper is the chosen method for frozen storage,” spokesperson Amy Rose wrote in an email.

The problem is unique to Pfizer’s vaccine. The Moderna vaccine expected to receive emergency authorization later this week can be stored in most standard freezers, and is stable for 30 days at refrigerated temperatures. Only Pfizer’s shot requires such ultra-cold storage that doses will be kept in the containers they’re shipped in.

Neither the U.K. nor Canada has faced the issue yet. In both countries, the first Pfizer vaccines are being sent to sites equipped with ulta-cold freezers, so the shipping containers will not be used for storage after delivery.

In the U.S., once Pfizer had a signed supply contract with OWS, there was no reason for the company to go beyond what the terms require, said bioethicist Arthur Caplan, of New York University. “There’s way too much risk there, which they don’t need,” said Caplan. “If I’m Pfizer, I’ve sold my vaccine, I’ve made it, I’ve shipped it to where you told me, I’m not in the rest of these businesses, and I don’t care.”

Vaccine manufacturers and distributors are protected from liability claims under the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness (PREP) Act. But several experts say that, despite these protections, Pfizer may well have acted from a fear of repercussions.

“How much can Pfizer do? They don’t have their staff there,” said Mark Capofari, who was director of global logistics at Merck from 1995 to 2007 and currently lectures on supply chain management at Penn State University. “I don’t know if any company would want to be liable from that point forward.”

Given the lack of control Pfizer has once a vaccine reaches its destination, continuing to monitor temperature would bring unnecessary added risks. “It’s the job of the lawyers to anticipate potential claims,” said Dorit Reiss, law professor at the University of California, Hastings College of the Law, whose research focuses on vaccines.

Efforts to avoid liability tend to create inefficiencies and slow down the process, which the PREP act was intended to mitigate. The plan to change ownership of the temperature monitoring system “is only going to lead to disruptions and problems,” said Lawrence Gostin, a professor of global health law at Georgetown University. “It’s not efficient and reliable. And it’s unnecessary.”

Concerns over its public image could also have pushed Pfizer to disentangle itself from temperature monitoring at the final stage of vaccine storage. The company has garnered tremendous positive publicity through its quick development of a Covid-19 vaccine, and has an interest in protecting this reputation. “There could be publicity issues,” said Robert Field, professor of law and health management and policy at Drexel University. “If they’re concerned problems could occur at the end point, the pharmacy or wherever injections occur, they wouldn’t want to be associated. They may feel it’s not in their comfort zone, that’s not their expertise.”

Companies are naturally risk-averse and, having created a vaccine, there’s little benefit to Pfizer in continuing to keep track of vaccine storage standards beyond the delivery date. “It’s wiping your hands of accountability. You don’t want to be blamed legally or publicly, you don’t want to be held accountable and so push it over to some other entity, in this case the government,” said Gostin. “History teaches us that companies will try to protect themselves and the bottom line at any cost. Any time they can push off responsibility, whether it’s to a government or a hospital or private hospital or to a doctor’s office or pharmacy, they will.”

Public debt monetisation and the credibility of the ECB

Source: Social Europe

July 28 2020

By Pompeo Della Posta

What stops public debt being monetised to avoid the pain of prolonged austerity after the pandemic? An obsolete economic theory of ‘credibility’.

In the conditions, akin to wartime, resulting from the Covid-19 pandemic, public debt is being created—and more will have to be created—to meet the exceptional fiscal needs arising. Many economists, of different orientations (Blanchard and Pisani-Ferry, Giavazzi and Tabellini, Galì, De Grauwe), suggest that this debt should be ‘monetised’—bought up on primary markets by central banks, with the creation of new money. This would avoid the accumulation of public debt and the consequent need to adopt future austerity policies for its repayment, hindering growth.

The main objections to such direct-money financing of public expenditure in the European economic and monetary union (EMU) relate to its institutional feasibility—given the requirements of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union—and the negative effects it would supposedly have on the anti-inflationary credibility of the European Central Bank.

The first objection is, of course, rather serious—although only so long as insufficient political will prevents its resolution via treaty change, to which I shall return. To deal with the second, it is worth recalling the evolution of the theory of ‘credibility’.

‘Rational expectations’

The first generation of credibility theory, dating back to the 1970s and 1980s—in particular the contributions of Kydland and Prescott and Barro and Gordon—contended that central banks should follow monetary rules rather than exercise discretion. In the latter case, it was asserted, the ‘rational expectations’ of economic actors would anticipate the central bank’s ‘time inconsistency’ problem, namely its purported incentive to renege on the initial promise not to run an expansionary monetary policy and instead reduce unemployment by managing a surprise injection of money to increase the price level—thereby reducing real wages and inducing employers to hire more workers.

The expectation of inflation would, it was contended, pre-emptively become a self-fulfilling prophecy, leaving no real effect on unemployment and production, which would remain anchored to levels presumed naturally dictated by the market. ‘Tying the hands’ of central banks by imposing strict rules on them, then, would solve the ‘time inconsistency’ problem.

This theory—however questionable its deterministic chain of argumentation—was convenient for those believing in the unconditional virtues of free markets and unconcerned about unemployment in the post-Keynesian era. It became the theoretical basis on which the ECB’s institutional architecture was built, to preserve its anti-inflationary credibility.

Optimum currency areas

This conclusion conflicted with the basic approach of the parallel flow of literature on optimum currency areas (OCA). From a different perspective, this also implied tying the hands of the central bank, although through participation in a fixed exchange-rate system or a monetary union, rather than by imposing stringent domestic rules.

More specifically, OCA theory examined the conditions to be met for a currency or monetary union—in which exchange-rate and monetary independence were renounced—to be optimal. It did so by asking how likely an asymmetric shock affecting a country would be (Kenen’s product-diversification criterion), how easily it could be absorbed by automatic market mechanisms (Mundell‘s criterion on mobility and flexibility of labour and capital) and how effective the forsworn exchange-rate instrument might have been (McKinnon‘s criterion on the degree of openness).

Credibility theory, being based until then on deterministic models, should not have been part of this debate, but it was wrongly credited as being the ‘new’ OCA theory (Tavlas). In this view, since monetary independence produced only an inflationary bias, without any substantive benefit, giving it up by joining a currency or monetary union would always be optimal, because it would avoid running the risk of inflation.

Justice was only done when the second generation of credibility theory took instead a stochastic approach—recognising contingency and randomness. This led to the same conclusion as OCA theory: if production is hit by an unexpected and asymmetric shock, one can no longer conclude that rules (whether a domestic or an external tying of hands) are always preferable to discretion.

If the problem is uncertainty as to central-bank behaviour over time, credibility is at issue, but this is not the problem when a stochastic shock affects the economy and needs to be absorbed in the here and now (Lohmann). The rules, therefore, should not be fixed, but rather state-contingent (Svensson) and policy-makers cannot gain credibility by following policies that are not credible (Drazen and Masson). How, in 1992, for example, could the Italian central bank gain credibility and an anti-inflationary reputation by following a fixed rule of exchange-rate stability that damaged the Italian economy?

Less costly

And, in the current situation, how could the ECB lose its anti-inflationary credibility if it agreed to buy government bonds on the primary market or if it financed citizens directly by crediting their current account—which would not entail any inflationary risk and would be less costly for the euro-area economies than recourse to debt? After all, that is what the Bank of England and the Federal Reserve are doing. In fact, the future repayment of these debts would risk jeopardising the economic-recovery capacities of the countries in question, which would have to resort to recessionary austerity policies.

During the eurozone crisis, European countries already followed restrictive fiscal policies, the opposite of what the United Kingdom and the United States did. It is not to these policies—which perversely increased the ratio of public debt to gross domestic product, due to their larger contractionary effect on the denominator—that we owe the end of the crisis. Rather, that came with the reassurance of the ‘whatever it takes’ monetary commitment by the then ECB president, Mario Draghi.

Restrictive fiscal policies were implemented not because they were coherent or validated but because of the distrust of European countries towards one another. It was this mistrust which fostered the belief that, without limiting fiscal looseness, the associated ‘moral hazard’ would produce excessive growth of public debt.

It seems that today we shall make a similar mistake—this time in terms of an inappropriate monetary, rather than fiscal, policy. The reason, however, is the same—mutual mistrust and the fear that the expectation of debt monetisation would induce irresponsible, ‘freeriding’ behaviour.

Such fear is engendered by the continuing incompleteness and indeed fragmentation of economic and monetary union. Which carries a high cost—a cost that should be sufficient to foster the political will necessary to avoid it and so to enjoy the full benefits of EMU.

US and Europe should brace for second Covid-19 wave

Source: The Guardian

May 20 2020

The prospect of a second wave of coronavirus infection across Europe is no longer a distant theory, according to the director of the EU agency responsible for advising governments – including the UK – on disease control.

“The question is when and how big, that is the question in my view,” said Dr Andrea Ammon, director of the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC).

It has been the unenviable task of scientists to tell it as it is through the coronavirus pandemic. While politicians have been caught offering empty reassurances, the epidemiologists, a job title new to many, have emerged as the straight shooters of the crisis, sometimes to their detriment.

And Ammon, a former adviser to the German government, speaks frankly in her first interview with a UK newspaper since the crisis began.

“Looking at the characteristics of the virus, looking at what now emerges from the different countries in terms of population immunity – which isn’t all that exciting, between 2% and 14%, that leaves still 85% to 90% of the population susceptible – the virus is around us, circulating much more than January and February … I don’t want to draw a doomsday picture but I think we have to be realistic. That it’s not the time now to completely relax.”

Earlier this month the former hospital doctor, who worked through the various levels of healthcare bureaucracy to be become ECDC director in 2017, announced that, as of 2 May, Europe as a whole had passed the peak of infections. Only Poland was technically not yet there, she said.

European governments have started easing their lockdown restrictions, some to the extent that bars and restaurants will soon reopen, others rather more tentatively. Boris Johnson has tweaked his message to Britons from “stay at home” to “stay alert” and is seeking to send pupils back into schools in a fortnight.

FacebookTwitterPinterest ‘The virus is around us’ ... the beach in Southend-on-Sea, England, 17 May. Photograph: John Keeble/Getty Images

Ammon’s job is to scrutinise the fallout and catch any rise in infections early. Talking through Skype from her kitchen at home, from where she has been working remotely for the last two months, she insists a disastrous second wave is not inevitable if people stick to the rules and keep their distance.

But she detects an ominous weakening of the public’s resolve.

“I think now it’s beginning to strain. What we see is that, on the one hand, the economic part for small and medium-sized businesses but also the experience of people not being able to exercise all the freedoms that we normally have: to go where we like, to be with whom we want to be. And this is a quite fundamental change to our normal way of life.

“And especially now when it is clear [infections] are going down, people think it is over. Which it isn’t, which it definitely isn’t.”

Asked whether the data was showing any repercussions, Ammon gave a deadpan answer. “Not yet. I mean, maybe it doesn’t come ever, maybe all the adjustment of these measures is done in a prudent way. This is something we are really right now are closely monitoring: what is happening after all these measures.”

As of Wednesday 158,134 people have died from Covid-19 in the EU and the UK, Norway, Liechtenstein and Iceland, according to ECDC data for the countries the agency monitors.

The UK has the highest level of deaths in Europe, with 35,341, followed by Italy (32,169) and France (28,022).

A total of 1,324,183 cases of infection have been reported. Among those is a member of Ammon’s own staff. Only a skeleton group of fewer than 10 now work in the agency’s office in Stockholm.

“Part of our crisis team that needs to be there because they need very close cooperation. But they’re sitting wide apart. Honestly. We have to do what we preach.”

Ammon recalls that it was only in late January that it had become clear that a novel virus causing a cluster of deaths in the Chinese city of Wuhan could be transmitted human to human, with initial concerns focusing on the possibility of the disease spreading through imports.

As the extremely contagious nature of the virus emerged, the ECDC advised governments on 26 January to strengthen the capacities of their health services. There was fear of them being overwhelmed, as was shortly to be the case with tragic results in Lombardy in northern Italy.

“We did really emphasise that these plans have to be updated. And in particular, the hospital preparedness needs to be looked at, how to make sure to have a surge capacity for beds, in general, but also in particular for intensive care unit beds.

“I think what turned out is that [the governments] underestimated, in my view, the speed of how this increase came. Because, I mean, you know, it’s a different situation if you have to look for an increased capacity of beds within two weeks or within two days.”

Ammon believes that when the inevitable inquiries look into the twists and turns of the crisis, the return of holidaymakers from Alpine skiing breaks in the first week of March will be seen as a pivotal moment in the spread of Covid-19 into Europe.

 A tourist wearing a protective respiratory mask in Rome on 28 February. Photograph: Andreas Solaro/AFP via Getty Images

“Because at that time we saw that new cases all over Europe [and] actually [they] had been in the skiing places in the Alps, in Italy, Austria. I mean this is a crowded place, the ski resorts, and then you have these cabins that you go up the mountain and these are really crammed. Yeah, it’s just perfect for such a virus. I mean I am pretty sure that this contributed to the wide spread in Europe.”

Lockdowns followed – a theoretical possibility in the pandemic planning that few believed was feasible. “I remember when China put the lockdown to Wuhan, people told me, ‘Look this wouldn’t be possible in Europe.’ Hmm.”

Now the lockdowns were straining the public’s tolerance, she said, but questioned whether they still came in too late and whether swifter action could have saved more lives. “I believe if we would have put in these measures earlier, it might have been possible, but … these measures are so stark, I mean they are so out of our experience that it, I think it needed … unfortunately the situation in northern Italy to make everybody clear that it is necessary.”

Ammon now believes the battle with coronavirus will be a long haul. “I don’t know whether it’s forever but I don’t think it will go away very quickly. It seems to be very well adapted to humans.”

She is yet to book a summer holiday and warns those craving a break away to prepare for some disappointment. “What we are saying is that they should be prepared that even if there are some holidays and they go somewhere, it will not be comparable to what they had last year. At this stage we cannot say you can go out there, wash your hands and everything is fine. You have to keep your distance. These measures have to be in place.”

But despite the privations of recent months, Ammon expresses little sympathy for the argument put forward by some, including the former supreme court judge Jonathan Sumption that merely shielding the elderly would have been sufficient.

“People who are perfectly healthy are also getting severe illness and they die. Knowing what we have seen in Europe with approximately 10% of the population [infected] I think there is for me not an option to let this go. If the the other 90% would have come as well, I think we don’t want to think of this.”

Meanwhile in the United States, Obama administration scientists say the country must rebuild its emergency medical stockpile before fall. Plus, why Africa’s pandemic innovations have been ignored.

A group of nine leading scientists who advised President Barack Obama has warned that the US has just three months to rebuild its stockpile of emergency medical equipment if it wants to be prepared for a second wave of coronavirus in the fall. In a seven-page report, whose lead author was the White House science adviser for both Obama terms, the experts fault the Trump administration for failing to replenish the Strategic National Stockpile in preparation for a pandemic just like the one we’re living through now.

People wait in line at a food bank in Harlem, New York

Black Americans are dying from coronavirus at three times the rate of white people, according to figures compiled by the non-partisan APM Research Lab. In certain states the racial divide is even more stark: in Kansas, for instance, black people are dying at seven times the rate of whites. More than 20,000 African Americans have died from the disease – that’s almost one in 2,000 of the entire black population in the US.

As Lois Beckett writes, the government’s pandemic response has been warped by racism, with the health secretary, Alex Azar, apparently blaming the disease’s victims for their ill health:

"Someone had to be held responsible for an American death toll approaching 100,000 people, worse than any other country’s reported deaths. In order for the Trump administration to remain blameless, someone else had to be blamed, and the administration was now blaming the dead."

EU aims to counter Chinese, Russian influence at Balkan summit

Source: Today online
May 6 2020

BRUSSELS/BELGRADE - European Union (EU) leaders host a summit on Wednesday with their six Balkan counterparts whose praise for Chinese and Russian support during the coronavirus crisis has ruffled feathers in the bloc, officials and diplomats said.

The EU says it has not been given enough credit for the 3.3 billion euros (£2.9 billion) it is providing, which officials said outweigh medical supplies Beijing and Moscow sent to Serbia and Bosnia in the early phase of the epidemic.

The summit, planned for the Croatian capital Zagreb 20 years after the first ever EU-Balkan gathering, will take place via video from 1430 GMT, linking the heads of Serbia, Kosovo, Montenegro, Albania, Bosnia and North Macedonia with the 27 EU leaders.

Still scarred by 1990s wars, all six countries aspire to join the EU, though the response to the COVID-19 disease is likely to dominate.

"The summit itself is the message, to say: we want you to join," said a senior EU diplomat involved in preparing the summit. "But we will also say that you cannot pander to the Chinese and the Russians when it suits you."

China and Russia flew doctors and medical supplies to Bosnia and Serbia in March to help halt spreading of the coronavirus at a time when the EU's initial response was slow.

Serbian President Aleksandar Vucic publicly thanked President Xi Jinping and the Chinese people.

The Serb member of Bosnia's tripartite presidency, Milorad Dodik, praised Russia last month, criticising Brussels for initially limiting exports of medical aid to non-EU members.

"The Europe we believed in ten years ago does not exist today," he said at the time, although he later softened his language.

BATTLE FOR INFLUENCE

After years of neglect, the six countries now have the attention of EU governments, who have been worried about Chinese and Russian influence in the region for several years.

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen warned in November that if the EU did not do more, "others will."

In March, North Macedonia and Albania won approval to start EU membership talks after a two-year delay, helping to counter a sense in the region that hopes of joining the bloc were fading.

"We can't go backwards. The people in the region have nothing to fear," North Macedonia's Foreign Minister Nikola Dimitrov told a think-tank event. "The whole (EU) process is to help become prosperous, functioning democracies."

Vucic said on Saturday he had his own demands of EU leaders: "We will be asking (EU enlargement) commissioner Oliver Varhelyi for a bit more grants and fewer loans."

To add to the problems, five EU countries do not recognise Kosovo's independence, including Spain.

At the summit, all leaders will appear against neutral backgrounds to avoid any insignia that one EU official said "would make the video conference difficult" as lingering diplomatic tensions mean nationalist symbols could cause offence.

Covidiot cuts hole in mask to make it ‘easier to breathe’

Source: New York Post
May 4 2020


A Kentucky covidiot was captured in a viral clip shopping with a hole cut in her face mask, claiming that it made it “easier to breathe.”

Footage posted on TikTok showed a gas station clerk stunned to see the woman enter the convenience store with her face mask slashed to expose her nose and mouth.

“Where did you get that mask from?” he asked the woman as she approached the counter.

“Well, since we have to wear them and it makes it hard to breathe, this makes it a lot easier to breathe,” she replied.

Joking, the bemused clerk responded, “Cutting it? Yeah, I’ll do that too, thanks for the advice.”

The footage, which has received more than 796,000 likes since Friday, comes after Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear announced that shoppers will be requested to wear masks while in public starting May 11.

“While it’s gonna seem strange and is probably uncomfortable, I want us to know that this is just another small sacrifice that we can make to make sure that we keep each other safe,” Beshear said, according to the Louisville Courier Journal.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has advised that face coverings should “fit snugly but comfortably against the side of the face.”

COVID-19: How an office outbreak in South Korea shows that protecting workers is vital for relaxing lockdown

Source: WEF
May 4 2020
By Sean Fleming

• Rapid action in Seoul, South Korea, to contain a COVID-19 outbreak in an office building could have implications on how to relax lockdowns around the world.

• On 9 March, a whole building in the city was isolated and shut down.

• Over 1,100 people were tested and more than 16,000 text message warnings were sent.

• Co-workers are found to be more at risk if they are clustered together, according to a new study.

Office workers may be facing a heightened risk of COVID-19 infection, according to a South Korean study. The investigation by the Korea Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (KCDC) into an outbreak in a high-rise building in one of Seoul’s busiest districts has shown how the virus can trigger clustered infections.

It could have implications for decisions on how best to relax lockdown restrictions around the world. But it also illustrates the importance of taking prompt, effective action to limit the spread of infection.

Speed and scale of response

On 8 March, a COVID-19 outbreak was detected in a multi-use building in the South Korean capital, referred to as Building X. It has offices on its lower floors and residential apartments from floor 13 to 19. Once that first case had been found, a total of 1,145 people were placed under immediate investigation – 922 worked at the building, 203 lived there, plus 20 visitors. All but two were subsequently tested, with 97 confirmed cases of infection detected. That represents an attack or infection rate of 8.5% overall.

Timeline and location of infections at Building X in Seoul, South Korea.

This kind of fast, decisive action has been the mainstay of South Korea’s response to the coronavirus pandemic. It’s helped the country avoid some of the problems others have faced – overwhelmed health services and high rates of death, to name but two. The strategy was outlined by South Korean Foreign Minister Kang Kyung-wha at a virtual World Economic Forum COVID Task Force meeting in March: an immediate response involving multiple agencies, and lots of communication with the public.

On 9 March, Building X was closed, demonstrating the rapid-action strategy favoured by the Korean authorities. People whose test results confirmed they had the coronavirus were isolated. Anyone they had come into contact with was also investigated, tested and monitored for 14 days, whether or not they displayed any symptoms.

Those who tested negative were ordered to stay quarantined for 14 days and were retested during their quarantine.

Using mobile phone data from telecoms operators, the authorities were able to identify people who had been in the near vicinity of the building. Anyone who had spent more than five minutes close to the building was sent a text message telling them to stay away from others and get themselves immediately tested. In total, 16,628 such text messages were sent out.

Office workers – the next vulnerable group?

Of the 97 people found to have the virus, most (94) worked at a call centre on the 11th floor of the building. When looking at the effect of the virus on the 216 people who worked on that floor, the attack rate jumps to 43.5%.

“This outbreak shows alarmingly that severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) can be exceptionally contagious in crowded office settings such as a call centre,” the report says.

The blue patches indicate the workstations of infected call centre staff.

Even though workers and residents at Building X came into close contact via shared facilities such as the elevators, the infection clustered around one set of people – those who worked near each other. This “indicates that the duration of interaction (or contact) was likely the main facilitator for further spreading of SARS-CoV-2,” the report continued.

As many countries around the world start to move toward relaxing their lockdown restrictions, there are concerns about how to get people back to work while keeping them safe and avoiding subsequent waves of severe infection. The Seoul study raises concerns about the virus’s capacity to create significant pockets of infection among office workers and demonstrates the importance of getting such decisions right.

“Targeted preventive strategies might help mitigate the risk for SARS-CoV-2 infection in (this) vulnerable group,” the report concludes.

Australian media lost independence in hyping up so-called intelligence report: expert

Source: Global Times

May 3 2020

Western media outlets, particularly those in Australia, have lost their self-proclaimed journalistic professionalism and independence, as they rushed to hype up an unverified "Five Eyes" intelligence report that clearly seeks to smear China's handlining of the coronavirus outbreak, a Chinese expert said on Sunday.

The latest development out of Australia could also further exacerbate rising tensions between China and Australia over the latter's call for an investigation into China's handling of COVID-19, Li Haidong, a professor at the Institute of International Relations of the China Foreign Affairs University, told the Global Times on Sunday.

"Australian media, in hyping up such an unverifiable research dossier to smear China, has lost journalistic professionalism and objectivity. Some Australian media reports are always full of ideological bias against China and show their lack of confidence," Li said.

The Daily Telegraph, an Australian media outlet, reported on Saturday that it learned from an investigation dossier by the Five Eyes intelligence agencies that China deliberately suppressed or destroyed evidence of the coronavirus outbreak in an "assault on international transparency."

The report said that the 15-page research document they obtained showed that the Chinese government covered up news of the virus, destroyed evidence of it in its laboratories and denied of human-to-human transmission.

After the Daily Telegraph report, other Western media outlets also joined in hyping up the so-called dossier. But US intelligence is not confirming the existence of the 15-page document, US media outlet Fox News reported on Sunday.

The Five Eyes alliance consists of intelligence agencies from the US, the UK, Canada, Australia and New Zealand.

"Even if there was such a dossier, the Five Eyes alliance was established for the political aim of the five countries. Its investigation reports will only meet their political demands, instead of scientific truth," Li said.

Chinese officials have repeatedly criticized some western media and politicians for playing up the so-called "China concealing the epidemic" theory, calling such efforts are attempt to cover up their own failures in containing the virus in their countries.

The Chinese Foreign Ministry has already provided specific timelines detailing the main facts about China's timely release of information on the epidemic, sharing of experiences on prevention and control, and promoting international cooperation on the prevention and control of COVID-19 since the end of December.

It has also reiterated on many occasions that China always upholds an open, transparent and responsible attitude on the prevention and control of COVID-19. China also immediately reported COVID-19 to the World Health Organization (WHO), shared the gene sequence of the novel coronavirus with other countries, and carried out cooperation with the international community on prevention and control of the pandemic, officials have noted.

Some Western accusations against China over the COVID-19 even run counter to the findings of the WHO and even public statements from their own officials.

The WHO sated on Friday that COVID-19 was natural in origin, after having listened again and again to numerous scientists, who have looked at the sequences, analyzing the virus.

The US Intelligence Community also concurs with the scientific consensus that COVID-19 was not manmade or genetically modified, according to a statement issued by the office of the Director of National Intelligence of the US on its website on Friday.

Also, Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison, when asked about US President Donald Trump's statement that "the novel coronavirus originated from a laboratory in Wuhan," said he did not see strong evidence to prove this on May 1.

However, since the outbreak of COVID-19 in Western countries, some media and politicians have continued to accuse China of concealing the pandemic and has even associated the novel coronavirus with a lab in Wuhan.

Li noted that Australia and some other Western countries made a fatal mistake in their handling of the pandemic and now seek to blame the WHO and China for their failure to fight the outbreak.

According to data released by Johns Hopkins University in the US, the number of confirmed COVID-19 cases in the US has reached over 1,133,000 as of 1 pm on Sunday. The UK has about 183,500 reported cases, Canada has nearly 58,000 cases, Australia has 6,799 cases and New Zealand has 1,478 cases.

The latest report in Australia media also came as China and Australia are engaged in a war of words over the latter's call for a so-called independent investigation into the global response to the coronavirus, including China's early response to the outbreak in Wuhan, Central China's Hubei Province.

Chinese officials have harshly criticized the move. In an interview with NBC news on Tuesday, Chinese Vice Foreign Minister Le Yucheng said that China is open to an honest international investigation and scientific exchanges among scientists.

What the Chinese side opposes is putting China in the dock without any evidence, presuming guilt in advance and then seeking evidence through so-called international investigations, Le said, adding that it is well known that so called "information" from the US intelligence community has caused many disasters to the world.

Australian media said that the Five Eyes dossier also showed that the Chinese ambassador to Australia carried out economic coercion on Australia and that China has blocked the international community in launching an independent investigation into the source of the virus.

"Some Australian media and political elites have lost their independent judgment of the country's overall interests and have adopted a US-led approach to smearing China over COVID-19. They are hurting the profound friendship between the two peoples and the common interests that have long coalesced," said Li, the expert.

Group of U.S. Scientists and Billionaires Secret Waging 'War' Against COVID-19

Source: Newsweek
April 28 2020
By Jason Murdock

A highly-qualified cabal of scientists, academics and Nobel Prize winners, backed by billionaires, has banded together to research novel ways of fighting back against COVID-19.

The assembled group—Scientists to Stop COVID-19—has been working behind-the-scenes in recent months to compile an advisory report outlining what they believe to be the best ways of treating the infectious disease and restoring the economy.

The existence of the team was first reported by The Wall Street Journal (WSJ), which revealed its work had already been delivered to Vice President Mike Pence, who leads the White House coronavirus task force, and influenced decisions made by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA).

The collective, being spearheaded by physician-turned-venture capitalist Tom Cahill, is benefiting from the shared knowledge of at least a dozen men and women working at the upper echelons of the scientific and academic communities.

Current team members include Akiko Iwasaki, Professor of Immunobiology at Yale University School of Medicine, Lynn Goldman, Dean and Professor at the George Washington University, Stuart Schreiber, a Professor of Chemistry and Chemical Biology at Harvard University, and many more.

The WSJ reported Cahill has tapped connections made through his investment firm, including billionaires Peter Thiel, Jim Palotta and Michael Milken.

A report, obtained and published by the WSJ, identifies drugs that could potentially be used to treat COVID-19 and highlights American companies that are best suited to help produce, distribute or research pharmaceuticals, drugs or antibodies.

The members are sifting through peer-reviewed research to find the most promising results, then attempting to flag them to health officials and the federal government.

The 17-page report claims that none of the group members have "any direct or known indirect financial interests" in companies named in the analysis. The WSJ noted some plans appeared to be "unorthodox," including the proposed treatment of patients with drugs first intended for Ebola in higher doses than have been used in the past.

"The war against COVID-19 is being fought on multiple fronts," the report notes.

"We describe plans to develop therapeutics and vaccines, and to reopen our businesses and schools, that could be deployed in several waves.

"We are a group of passionate citizen-scientists who offer four actionable non-partisan proposals to produce safe and effective COVID-19 therapeutics and vaccines in the shortest possible time frame, and to reopen our society in a manner that reduces the risk of future COVID-19 outbreaks." They went on to detail a four-point plan.

According to the team, the first wave of therapies will be focused on the use of existing drugs, with testing during April-May 2020 and then use immediately afterwards.

The second wave will develop antibody drugs, with testing from June-August 2020. The third is the creation of vaccines, with a test timeline of March 2020-March 2021.

The fourth point, reopening of the economy, should start around May-June this year, but must be based on science-driven symptom reporting and virus testing, they say.

"It is critical that approaches to drugs, vaccines, and reopening our society be pursued and supported simultaneously," ," the paper stated. "To defeat this novel coronavirus in the United States, and around the world, will require a massive and well-organized collaborative effort from government, industry, philanthropy, and citizens. It is vital that we establish these partnerships and take actions immediately."

The group told the WSJ they are aware their ideas may not be taken on board by the U.S. government or its coronavirus task force. "We may fail," Harvard University chemist Schreiber told the newspaper. "But if it succeeds, it could change the world."

Virus has mutated into 10 types, one now dominant across regions: Study

Source: The Times of India
April 28 2020
By Yogita Rao

MUMBAI: The novel coronavirus, first reported in China in December 2019, has mutated into 10 different types and one of them -A2a- has nearly replaced all the others to become dominant across geographical regions, says a global study by an Indian institute.

The study, by Nidhan Biswas and Partha Majumder from the National Institute of Biomedical Genomics in Kalyani, West Bengal, will soon be published in the Indian Journal of Medical Research (ICMR).

The novel coronavirus with the A2a mutation is highly efficient in entering human lung cells in larger numbers. The previous SARS-CoV that killed 800 and infected 8,000 people 10 years ago was also adept in entering the lungs, but not as much as A2a. It is efficient in transmission and resultantly, Covid-19 became prevalent across all regions, wrote the authors. The study is crucial as it provides vaccine manufacturers with a specific target.

The 10 types have evolved from the ancestral type 'O' over four months. A2a started overtaking other types across the world by March-end. "It has became the dominant type of SARS-CoV2," said Majumder.

The NIBG researchers used the RNA sequence data shared by Covid-19 researchers from across the world in a public database, GISAID. The team used RNA sequences of 3,600 coronaviruses collected from 55 countries from December 2019 to April 6, 2020.

The first observation was that the coronavirus has evolved into new types during its spread within China and the rest of the world. "The coronavirus can be classified into many types - O, A2, A2a, A3, B, B1 - and so on. Currently, there are 11 types, including type O which is the 'ancestral' type that originated in Whuan," said Majumder, distinguished professor and founding director of the institute.

"To live, a virus must propagate by infecting other animals. A mutation usually disables the virus from transmitting itself," said Majumder. However, some mutations enable the virus to transmit more efficiently and infect more persons. "Such mutant viruses increase the frequency (of transmission) and sometimes completely replace the original type if the virus. The SARS-CoV2 is doing just that," he added.

The coronavirus infection, or Covid, begins in the patient's throat, then enters his lungs and multiplies, causing breathing difficulties. The scientists said thw A2a mutation altered a component of the spike protein (the major protein on the surface) of the coronavirus, allowing it ti bind more easily with the surface protein of the lung cell, said Majumder. Covid-19 has emerged as a pandemic because of the A2a type's ability to transmit easily.

Even though the sample of RNA sequences used from infected persons in India was very small (35), the study shoed that A2a accounted for 47,5% of the samples. Interestingly, more persons with type A2a have no known travel history to countries outside India. For any conclusions on weather type A2a is dominant in India, more samples of RNA sequences are required, said the researchers.

The study is important for the fight against Covid-19 to develop vaccines ans also to determine the presence of c0-existence of type A2a with other types in some regions. Studies are required to find out weather the co-existence is because of the ethnic composition of these regions or it's because of their travel patterns. researchers ath the institute are trying to answer some of these questions.

Will the coronavirus pandemic be the final nail in the coffin for China’s manufacturing dominance?

Source: SCMP

April 28 2020

By Edward Tse

While some labour-intensive supply chains and those that target the US market may move out of China, sophisticated manufacturing clusters related to electronics and the internet of things are not easy to replicate quickly.

The Covid-19 outbreak has many speculating whether there will be a mass exit by foreign companies from China after the pandemic. Indeed, the crisis has delivered massive blows to many companies’ supply chains.

A March survey by the American Chamber of Commerce in South China indicates that all 237 respondents have seen their supply chains affected, and 15 per cent of respondents were already out of some supplies.

Some governments have echoed these concerns. On April 7, Japan unveiled a relief package of almost US$1 trillion, of which around US$2 billion was earmarked to help manufacturers diversify supply chains away from geographical clusters – primarily China – to other nations.

Soon after, US National Economic Council director Larry Kudlow suggested that the White House should “pay the moving cost” of American companies wanting to get out of China.

On April 14, French carmaker Renault put the brakes on its loss-making venture with Dongfeng Motor Corporation in Wuhan, transferring full ownership of its Wuhan plant to Dongfeng. Unsurprisingly, this triggered worries that foreign companies are starting to leave China because of the pandemic.

People sit inside Renault’s EZ-GO at the Auto China 2018 motor show in Beijing on April 25, 2018. Renault transferred full ownership of its Wuhan plant to Donfeng Motor Corp this month. Photo: Reuters

Such anxiety is not new. Ever since the virus outbreak, some pundits have predicted China’s relative decline in a post-pandemic “new world order”. Among them was US Secretary of Commerce Wilbur Ross, who said on January 31 that the virus would “help accelerate” the return of jobs to North America.

In early April, US journalist Daniel Greenfield wrote in an article, titled “Pandemic hardening can make America great”, that Covid-19 would lead to a “re-ruralisation” of the US. Instead of massive malls selling a plethora of “Made in China” goods, smaller businesses would sell products made locally for “a more decentralised shopping experience”.

There are three main types of supply chains in China. First, labour-intensive ones, such as those in toys, shoes and apparel. For more than a decade, these businesses have been moving from China to lower-cost countries like Vietnam, Bangladesh and Cambodia. They will continue to do so.

The second type includes companies relying predominantly on the US market as their export destination. As a result of elevated US tariffs due to the trade war, they
have been transferring at least part of their supply chains to other areas with lower tariffs. For them, unless the US reduces the tariffs, there is little reason to shift back to China.


US-China trade war forces some Chinese factories to move to Southeast Asia

The third type involves a myriad of suppliers, often located in clusters, to support a main manufacturer, which needs to optimise cost-effectiveness, quality, timeliness and responsiveness. Achieving optimum performance requires an agile combination of scale, operational efficiency and technological sophistication in development, design, testing and prototyping.

This applies to sectors like smartphones, consumer electronics and those involving the internet of things and artificial intelligence. While certain forces will indeed pull some of these supply chains away from China after the pandemic, China also enjoys unequalled advantages.

Designing and maintaining this sort of sophisticated supply chain is not a trivial matter. Manufacturers in China, including their supplier clusters, often with local governmental support, have built this system up over several decades.

In our conversations with clients, we found that senior executives of many global multinationals are now focused on ensuring their companies’ operational stability and cash flow sustainability. They have no immediate plans to leave China.

Employees maintain social distancing guidelines while eating lunch at a Dongfeng Honda auto plant in Wuhan, China, on March 23. After a two-month lockdown, people were allowed to go back to work in the city that was the centre of China’s Covid-19 epidemic. Photo: AFP

These perspectives echo a March survey by the American chambers of commerce in Beijing and Shanghai and consultancy PwC, which found that most US firms in China have no plans to relocate production elsewhere. Likewise, according to Jörg Wuttke, head of the European Union Chamber of Commerce, European manufacturers are also “not eager to exit China”.

Multinationals take their China strategy very seriously and won’t rush into a decision without evaluating several factors, including the post-pandemic global order and the changing nature of globalisation. Of course, for many global executives, the political overhang on top of the pandemic-derived arguments triggers emotional responses and sometimes bewilderment.

Some predict a wave of “deglobalisation” and “deChina-isation”. Conceivably, parts of supply chains will become regionalised or localised in some countries. This could well be the case for those products that require less mass production and whose pricing provides sufficient room for manoeuvring of supply chain economics.

With the emergence of cloud technologies, industrial internet and automation, the future of manufacturing will become more intelligent and distributed, potentially resetting how companies optimise their global manufacturing footprint.

Employees resume work at an electronic components factory after an extended Lunar New Year holiday in Sihong county, Jiangsu province, China, on February 10. The emergence of cloud technologies, industrial internet and automation will change companies’ manufacturing strategies. Photo: EPA-EFE/XU

China is likely to remain the core manufacturing hub, or one of the core hubs, for multinationals with the third type of supply chain.

The pandemic has brought numerous challenges for China: a protracted slowdown in the global economy, prevailing anti-China sentiment in the West and the mixing of politics and business. “National security” is now often misused to block Chinese companies from markets and technologies.

China’s manufacturing industry is suffering from core technology bottlenecks, such as in semiconductor chips. The country is currently a key purchaser from US chip makers such as Nvidia, Intel and Qualcomm, contributing a large portion of their total revenues. Nonetheless, China is expected to up the ante in the future to address these bottlenecks.

Despite these challenges, China is heading towards economic recovery, through innovation, investment and consumption. During the pandemic, multinationals’ executives have witnessed China’s governance and crisis management capabilities.

Looking ahead, we will see a surge in demand for digital infrastructure, built using technologies such as cloud services, the internet of things, artificial intelligence, 5G and blockchain technology, as the backbone of China’s next-generation smart cities.

We are unlikely to see a mass exodus of foreign companies from China. Most will carefully evaluate their strategy, both globally and with China at its core. In a new world order, which will combine globalisation with some degree of regionalisation and localisation, as well as some “reshoring”, companies need to adapt strategies and recalibrate global supply chains.

The post-pandemic “new normal” in China will continue to offer multinationals new opportunities in innovation, investment and fresh demand patterns.

Edward Tse is founder and CEO of Gao Feng Advisory Company, a global strategy and management consulting firm with roots in Greater China.

India Dismisses Plasma Therapy as Treatment for COVID-19

Source: Sputnik News

April 28 2020

New Delhi (Sputnik): China's National Health Commission says that transfusing plasma from recovered patients, containing antibodies effective against the virus can be used to treat severe cases of COVID-19. The US Food and Drug Administration has also approved plasma therapy for COVID-19 patients.

A few days after approving clinical trials of plasma therapy for COVID-19 treatment, India has dismissed the treatment, saying that it remains in experimental stage.

India’s ministry of health and family welfare joint secretary Lav Aggarwal said there is no evidence yet that plasma therapy can be used as a treatment.

He mentioned that the Indian Council of Medical Research has launched a national level study and “until ICMR concludes its study and a robust scientific proof is available, plasma therapy should be used only for research or trial purpose”.
Aggarwal warned that if plasma therapy is not used in a proper manner under proper guidelines then it can also cause life threatening complications. “Until it's approved no one should use it, it'll be harmful to the patient and illegal,” he said.

Last week, Delhi’s health minister said that plasma therapy was administered to six patients in Delhi and four of them had almost recovered. All of them were critical patients.
While China’s National Health Commission in March termed the therapy as effective on some severe patients, it warned against its use as a preventative measure for healthy people to gain immunity.

However, the US Food and Drug Administration announced on March 24 that it would allow researchers to begin experimental COVID-19 treatments using the plasma obtained from an individual recovered from coronavirus.

Scientists in Iceland claim they have found FORTY mutations of the coronavirus

Source: DailyMail

24 March 2020

By VANESSA CHALMERS

Scientists in Iceland claim they have found 40 mutations of the coronavirus, which has left the world gripped in fear.

The mutations were discovered by analysing swabs of COVID-19 patients in Iceland, where almost 600 cases have been reported so far.

Using genetic sequencing, the researchers identified how many mutations the virus had accumulated.

These genetic variants can act as the fingerprints of the virus to indicate where in the world it originated.

The Icelandic scientists were able to trace the coronavirus back to three European countries – Austria, Italy – the epicentre of the outbreak – and England.

Seven infected people all went to the same, undisclosed football match in England, the team claim.

Proteins making up these spikes also suggest to the scientists that this virus originally came from bats, and that mutations to them along their evolutionary progression are what make the virus able to penetrate human cells - particularly respiratory ones +3
Scientists in Iceland claim they have found 40 mutations of the coronavirus which has infected almost 385,000 people globally. Pictured, coronavirus cells up close

The scans have been colourised by medical visual artists to better delineate the virus from healthy cells. The spikes on the outer edge of the virus particles are what give coronaviruses their name - crown-like ('corona') +3
Using genetic sequencing, the researchers identified how many mutations the virus had accumulated (stock)

Viruses accumulate mutations as they evolve, which may or may not cause them to behave in different ways.

Mutating is a biological process which would have allowed the virus to attack the human body in the first place.

Scientists believe the infection lurked in animals for years, perhaps even decades, before it gained the ability to jump to humans.

Studying viruses using genomics helps to understand how they behave, which will help scientists fight the spiraling pandemic.

Icelandic scientists investigated the virus within their own country, where one death has been reported.

The Icelandic health authorities, along with genetics firm DeCode Genetics, tested 9,768 people for coronavirus, Information reports.

This included anyone who had been diagnosed, as well as people with symptoms or those in high risk groups for the coronavirus.

Some 5,000 volunteers who did not have any symptoms stepped forward to join the study – 48 of whom actually tested positive.

Complete genome sequencing was performed, which revealed clues about how the virus has evolved and the chain of transmission.

'We can see how viruses mutate,' said Kári Stefánsson, director of DeCode Genetics. 'We have found 40 island-specific virus mutations.

'We found someone who had a mixture of viruses. They had viruses from before and after the mutation, and the only infections traceable to that person are the mutated virus.'

One person was found to carry two variants of the coronavirus.

DeCode Genetics was able to trace how the virus entered Iceland, an island nation home to around 365,000 people.

Dr Stefánsson said: 'Some came from Austria. There is another type from people who were infected in Italy.

'And there is a third type of virus found in people infected in England. Seven people had attended a football match in England.'

The study has not yet been published, meaning it hasn't been scrutinized by other scientists.

'We can see how viruses mutate,' Kári Stefánsson, neurologist and director of DeCode Genetics for Information, said. Coronaviruses are so named because their structure has jagged edges which look like a royal crown – corona is crown in Latin (Pictured, an illustration of the 2019-nCoV released by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention)

Dr Derek Gatherer, an infectious disease specialist at Lancaster University, admitted he was not surprised with the findings.

He said: 'This is much as we would expect. All viruses accumulate mutations, but few of them are of much medical consequence.

'They are valuable in tracing the origins of infection chains. It looks like Iceland has imported quite a few infections from other European countries.'

Allan Randrup Thomsen, a virologist from the Department of Immunology and Microbiology at the University of Copenhagen, said the results described by the team 'make good sense'.

Professor Thomsen said: 'It is interesting with the 40 specific variants that fall into three clusters that can be traced back to specific sources of infection.'

'As a virologist, it is very exciting that you can start to see which pathways are infected. It is also something that we will see much more in the aftermath of the epidemic - these kinds of studies - because we want to see how viruses develop.

'Coronavirus is known as a virus that can mutate reasonably violently. We have seen reports of variants from China already. That way, it fits well with what one expects.'

A previous study in China, published in early March, suggested the coronavirus had mutated into at least two separate strains since the outbreak began in December. 

Peking University in Beijing studied the viral genome taken from 103 cases and found common mutations at two locations on the genome, which they named L and S.

They claimed that around 70 per cent of patients have caught the L strain, which is more aggressive and faster-spreading than S.

S is less aggressive but is thought to be the first strain of the virus which made the jump into humans and is continuing to infect new patients.

Critics urged caution over the study because it was only a small sample. They also said the two mutations does not mean there are two 'strains'.

However, both Dr Gatherer and Professor Thomsen expect the virus to develop to become more contagious but less pathogenic in the future.

Similar to the flu, COVID-19 may be more able to spread and infect more people as it becomes well adapted.

However, the variants that cause people to get really sick may die out.

Dr Gatherer said this process 'may take a couple of years'.

He said: 'The 2009 H1N1 swine flu was at its strongest in the initial summer 2009 pandemic and then came back quite strongly the following 2009/2010 winter.

'It wasn't until winter 2010/2011 that it had settled down a bit and was behaving more like a typical seasonal flu.

'COVID-19 might be back in subsequent winters, but it will probably be a little while before it is as mild as its relatives.'