I’ve thought long and hard about this. There is a constellation of circumstantial evidence around the most recently identified variant P.1, and what has been happening in Manaus, Brazil which makes me very seriously concerned. A thread 🧵

First Manaus has already been very hard hit by the pandemic. News reports in earlier stages told of rushed burials and bodies piling up https://t.co/sMkOwCmzVx
The crucial thing was the rapid rates of transmission, not really mitigated by ‘flattening the curve’ any. total per capita mortality was not as high as might be expected elsewhere, but only because the age structure of the population in Manaus skews young https://t.co/pZ43BPloj3
(I just did the calculation, the numbers of deaths are quite consistent with independent estimates of age stratified IFRs as per https://t.co/FlvXNRuECE)
By October 2020, 76% of the population were estimated to have been infected. This is based on a convenience sample of antibodies found in blood donors. I don’t like convenience samples and the true figure might well be lower, but not a lot lower https://t.co/gJ3nRJ19hL
That’s a large proportion, one might reasonably expect some degree of ‘herd immunity’, achieved at great cost. So given all that immunity, what’s happening in Manaus now? There’s actually an 'eruption' of infections, O2 shortages and escalating deaths https://t.co/8RSmY9MmVy
At the same time, the variant P.1, which I wrote about a couple days ago, has been identified.

https://t.co/M3r8hjlMKh
There’s not great sampling at present from the earlier stages of the pandemic in Manaus, so a lot may have happened evolution wise off camera, but the P.1 lineage is not recorded before November. It was 42% of samples from 15-23rd Dec CAVEAT not large numbers
I often complain that sampling doesn't account for sample size, bias etc. If this where a regular mutant, and somewhere other than Manau, I'd be complaining loudly. As it is I think we need to pay close attention
None of this is good but what does it mean? Well first Manaus shows what a ‘herd immunity’ strategy looks like in the absence of a vaccine: a huge amount of illness and death, a significant amount among those who cannot be callously written off as having 'comorbidities'
The factors favoring the emergence of P.1 in Brazil are not clear. If it’s like similar variants it may well be more transmissible. But is that enough in a place where you’d expect existing immunity to act as a brake? I don't know right now
We should be watching P.1 very closely indeed for data on both immune escape, and a different spectrum of severity from what we’re used to. I really hope this turns out to be a data artefact of some kind but worried it won’t. And the virus travels well
Especially when you close the stable door after... sigh

/end

More from World

Good question: what proofs has BDA provided of his authenticity?

Let's go through some of them.


- BDA predicted the Saudis would assassinate Suleimani. They did.
- He said the dog that got Badghadi's arm deserved a Medal Of Honor. The next day the President posted a joke image showing him giving the dog a MoH.

- He said one of his ops in Syria would severely disrupt a CIA drug trafficking operation. This was proved true within a few days:
https://t.co/Hranupwcxj
- He sent gold to Brazil to help pay for an anti-trafficking operation there. That op became public soon afterwards.

- On May 31 this year, he predicted the President would be giving a speech the next day. June 1, the President gives a surprise address at the Rose Garden.
- He predicted the US would be making diplomatic moves on Greenland. True.

- He said the US would be pulling all troops out of Afghanistan. This was confirmed within the month.
- He claimed earthquakes would be hitting Iran's nuclear facilities in December. Yep.
- There were FOUR facilities hit, not the three made public. Also true.
All the leftists in the comments like oh no prageru made a good point lol


Polls consistently show conservative support for nuclear energy. It also has high support among elites. The myth that it is unpopular in general isn’t true—although it is unpopular in almost every specific case where they need to site it

Article is old but yeah

This study finds that risk & benefit predict individual opinion the most, followed by the share of nuclear energy already extant, followed by ideology (conservatives support more)

This one finds that journalists attitude affect public perceptions, but that energy consultants, nuclear engineers, bureaucrats, and the military show the highest support for nuclear energy

You May Also Like

The UN just voted to condemn Israel 9 times, and the rest of the world 0.

View the resolutions and voting results here:

The resolution titled "The occupied Syrian Golan," which condemns Israel for "repressive measures" against Syrian citizens in the Golan Heights, was adopted by a vote of 151 - 2 - 14.

Israel and the U.S. voted 'No'
https://t.co/HoO7oz0dwr


The resolution titled "Israeli practices affecting the human rights of the Palestinian people..." was adopted by a vote of 153 - 6 - 9.

Australia, Canada, Israel, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, and the U.S. voted 'No' https://t.co/1Ntpi7Vqab


The resolution titled "Israeli settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and the occupied Syrian Golan" was adopted by a vote of 153 – 5 – 10.

Canada, Israel, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, and the U.S. voted 'No'
https://t.co/REumYgyRuF


The resolution titled "Applicability of the Geneva Convention... to the
Occupied Palestinian Territory..." was adopted by a vote of 154 - 5 - 8.

Canada, Israel, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, and the U.S. voted 'No'
https://t.co/xDAeS9K1kW