Viruses / Vaccines 2

HughFreakingDillon

mickeyrat said:

masks dont work...

https://www.threads.net/@linseycmarr/post/C7Wi5BJujeh/?xmt=AQGzw5K2POdGzVoJN1q4lu8tuP-4uD9zU-mj00EeAtsoUQ

Can't wait to hear what Bro Rogan has to say about that one. 

Halifax2TheMax

mickeyrat said:

masks dont work...

https://www.threads.net/@linseycmarr/post/C7Wi5BJujeh/?xmt=AQGzw5K2POdGzVoJN1q4lu8tuP-4uD9zU-mj00EeAtsoUQ

Everything we were told about Covid was and is a lie! Everything!!!

mickeyrat

https://www.threads.net/@danathesmith/post/C7ZPVbURB8d/?xmt=AQGzYV7n-_ZLvJwrIvkzR2QvwuUmvXugot7kdVTSangWDw

brianlux

mickeyrat said:

masks dont work...

https://www.threads.net/@linseycmarr/post/C7Wi5BJujeh/?xmt=AQGzw5K2POdGzVoJN1q4lu8tuP-4uD9zU-mj00EeAtsoUQ

It's amazing to me that so many people are willing to get into an enclosed flying metal tube for even a short flight- let a lone a long flight- without wearing an N95 mask.  I guess a lot of people like a high-risk lifestyle.  Not me, thank you very much!

23scidoo

Dr. Robert Redfield, the former Centers for Disease Control director, appears to be the latest person to come forward and criticize the COVID-19 vaccines he once praised during the China virus pandemic.

In a recent News Nation interview, Mayfield said major institutions such as the FDA and the CDC have lost credibility with the public after the COVID-19 pandemic.

“Those of us that tried to suggest there may be significant side effects from vaccines, we kind of got cancelled,” he said, “because no one wanted to talk about the potential that there was a problem from the vaccines.”

“But we have to be honest: Some people got significant side effects from the vaccine,” Redfield told show host Chris Cuomo. “I have a number of people that are quite ill, and they never had COVID, but they are ill from the vaccine. And we just have to acknowledge that.”

23scidoo

The Biden administration said it has suspended from all federal funding programs the scientist at the heart of the lab leak theory of the origins of the coronavirus, and proposed blocking him from receiving federal funding in the future. 

The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) sent a letter to Peter Daszak on Tuesday, less than a week after the agency took similar action against Daszak’s organization, EcoHealth Alliance (EHA).  

In the letter, HHS said it was holding Daszak responsible for EcoHealth Alliance’s failure to adequately monitor the activities of the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) and then subsequently failing to report on the lab’s high-risk virus studies. 

HughFreakingDillon

https://www.instagram.com/reel/C7c8I47vBfK/?igsh=MWtmd2xzYzJvMWZrag==

mickeyrat

https://publichealth.jhu.edu/2024/what-to-know-about-covid-flirt-variants

 

Skip to main content

Header main

What to Know About COVID FLiRT Variants Virologists are keeping an eye on several COVID variants that have all picked up the same set of mutations. Here’s what that means.

Published

May 13, 2024

By

Aliza Rosen

COVID-19

Infectious Diseases

Vaccines

At the end of March, the KP.2 variant was causing about 4% of infections in the U.S., according to the CDC

, while its parental strain, JN.1, was causing over 50% of infections at that time. As of early May, KP.2 makes up about 28% of infections, overtaking JN.1 as the dominant variant.

KP.2 is one of several variants being referred to as “FLiRT variants,” named after the technical names for their mutations. The prevalence of these variants comes at a critical time, when experts are deciding how to formulate the fall COVID vaccine.

In this Q&A, Andy Pekosz, PhD, a professor in Molecular Microbiology and Immunology, explains what virologists like him are seeing, whether these variants might cause a summer wave of infections, and how people can protect themselves.

What are these “FLiRT variants”?

This is the term being used to describe a whole family of different variants—including KP.2, JN.1.7, and any other variants starting with KP or JN—that appear to have independently picked up the same set of mutations. This is called convergent evolution. They are all descendants of the JN.1 variant that has been dominant in the U.S. for the past several months.

The particular mutations that people refer to as “FLiRT”s or “FLip”s refer to specific positions in the spike protein—in this case, positions 456, 346, and 572.

Viruses like SARS-CoV-2 mutate frequently, and when they mutate to evade recognition by antibodies, this often weakens their ability to bind to the cells they want to infect. We then see mutations appear that improve that binding ability. This is a cycle we have seen many times with SARS-CoV-2. The fact that these different variants are picking up the same mutations tells virologists that this combination of mutations is helping the virus accomplish these goals most efficiently.

How do these mutations help the virus bind to cells while evading antibodies?

Two of these mutations—456 and 346—eliminate binding sites for antibodies that neutralize SARS-CoV-2. However, those same antibody binding sites are also important for the virus to bind to and enter cells. So in evading antibodies, these FLiRT variants may have also lost some ability to bind to their receptor. At the same time, the 572 mutation appears to allow the virus to more tightly bind to cells and ultimately cause an infection.

Do people who recently had COVID have any protection against infection from FLiRT variants?

A JN.1 infection should provide pretty strong protection against all the FLiRT variants. The difference between JN.1 and these variants is only one or two amino acid changes, so there are still a lot of other places antibodies can bind to. Infection from a variant older than JN.1 is less likely to offer as much protection.

Do we know yet how well the current COVID-19 vaccines work against the FLiRT variants?

Against JN.1, the vaccine designed around XBB.1.5 does generate some cross-reactive antibodies. Studies have not been yet done with some of these newer variants, but those are likely to be a little less cross-reactive. It’s also been several months since many people received their last dose of the vaccine, and that immunity wanes over time.

Back in February, the CDC recommended an additional dose of the current COVID vaccine

for adults 65 and older who received theirs in the fall. There is a question now of what the guidance will be going into the summer. We’ve seen fairly low uptake of these additional boosters when they’re recommended, even in high risk populations, so it’s unclear whether a third dose of the current vaccine will be recommended. If case numbers remain relatively low, it may not be necessary.

Should we anticipate these variants to drive a surge in cases this summer?

It’s certainly possible. The FLiRT variants would be high on my list of viruses that could cause another wave of infections in the U.S. That said, our definition of a wave has changed; while we still see case rates rise and fall throughout the year, we see much lower numbers of cases of hospitalizations or deaths than we saw in the first couple years of the pandemic.

And yet, while these waves are becoming smaller, they are still having the greatest impact on our susceptible populations: the elderly, people who are immunocompromised and those with other secondary medical conditions. Everyone can play a role in protecting those populations that remain the highest-risk when new variants cause an uptick in cases.

How might these variants impact plans for the COVID vaccine formula that gets updated for the fall?

This is the time of year when governing bodies like the WHO and FDA recommend a formulation for updated COVID vaccines that will roll out in early fall. Last year, the vaccines were based on the XBB.1.5 variant, and only a few months later, the JN.1 variant became the dominant variant in the U.S.

At the end of April, the WHO announced

that their COVID vaccine advisory group advises using the JN.1 lineage as the antigen for the upcoming formulations of the vaccine. All of these FLiRT variants are within the JN.1 family of variants.

Here in the U.S., the FDA has postponed its meeting

to determine the fall 2024 COVID vaccine from mid-May to early June. That gives them more time to see which of the FLiRT variants is becoming the dominant one so they can fine-tune the WHO recommendation to what they anticipate will be most prominent in the fall.

New COVID variants are likely to crop up after a decision is made—just as it did last summer—but the goal remains to select a formulation that, come fall, will match the circulating variants as closely as possible.

What are the usual symptoms and transmission timeline for FLiRT variants?

When it comes to symptoms, we’re not seeing anything new or different with these variants. We continue to see more mild disease, but that’s likely not because the virus is milder, but because our immunity is so much stronger now. After years of vaccinations and infections, most of the population is better able to fight off an infection without as much concern for severe disease.

The period of infectiousness for these FLiRT variants remains the same as with JN.1 and previous omicron variants: After exposure, it may take five or more days before you develop symptoms, though symptoms may appear sooner. You are contagious one to two days before you experience symptoms and a few days after symptoms subside. And as with previous variants, some people may have detectable live virus for up to a week after their symptoms begin, and some may experience rebound symptoms.

At-home testing remains a really important tool for knowing whether you could potentially infect others.

Are antivirals like Paxlovid effective against FLiRT variants? 

Yes, the good news is that Paxlovid is still recommended for high risk individuals. It still works against variants up to JN.1, and based on the sequencing of the FLiRT variants, they should still be susceptible to Paxlovid, as well as to antiviral drugs like molnupiravir and remdesivir. The companies that produce these drugs are always testing them against new variants to ensure they continue to be effective.

How can people protect themselves and their loved ones as we head into summer?

As with any respiratory virus, even when case rates nationally are low, it’s common to see infections increase in one area of the country but not another. Keep an eye on case rates in your region or anywhere you plan to travel, to know whether you should take additional precautions, like wearing a mask or gathering in well-ventilated areas. Some local health departments report on virus levels in wastewater, which can signal an upcoming rise in cases. This is particularly helpful as people experience more mild illness; those cases may not require hospitalization, but they’ll still be detected in wastewater data.

It’s always a good idea to keep a few COVID tests around the house in case you start to  feel sick. Testing—whether at home or in a health care setting—will make sure you know what you're infected with, which can inform the best treatment plan if you are in a high risk group or your symptoms progress to more severe illness.

If you do feel sick, follow the CDC’s simplified guidance for respiratory illnesses. This is especially important if you plan to spend time with friends or family who are at higher risk of severe illness.

Aliza Rosen is a digital content strategist at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health.

Related:

• Understanding the CDC’s Updated COVID Isolation Guidance
• COVID Rebound Can Happen Whether or Not You Take Paxlovid
• More Americans Could Benefit from Paxlovid for COVID Infection

Related Content

Rotavirus the Leading Cause of Diarrheal Deaths Among Children Under 5, New Analysis Finds April 30, 2024

Outbreak Preparedness for All

April 12, 2024

Peter Agre’s Third Act May 15, 2024

What’s Happening With Dairy Cows and Bird Flu April 08, 2024

Decisive Action Needed to Stop Cervical Cancer Deaths

April 04, 2024

• 
  
• 
  
• 
  

Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health
615 N. Wolfe Street, Baltimore, MD 21205

Footer social

• LinkedIn
• Facebook
• Instagram
• Twitter
• Youtube

Footer menu primary

• Offices & Services
• Alumni
• Giving
• Calendars
• Careers
• Contact Us

Footer menu secondary

• Centers & Institutes Directory
• MyJHSPH

My.JH

• CoursePlus
• Student Information System

Johns Hopkins University

Footer menu extra

• Web Policies
• Accessibility
• Website Help

23scidoo

https://oversight.house.gov/release/wenstrup-requests-access-to-dr-faucis-personal-email-and-cellphone-investigates-secret-back-channel/
https://oversight.house.gov/release/wenstrup-investigates-nih-conspiracy-to-evade-foia-avoid-public-transparency/

Halifax2TheMax

23scidoo said:

https://oversight.house.gov/release/wenstrup-requests-access-to-dr-faucis-personal-email-and-cellphone-investigates-secret-back-channel/
https://oversight.house.gov/release/wenstrup-investigates-nih-conspiracy-to-evade-foia-avoid-public-transparency/

You’re putting your faith in Homer and Gym? Good luck with that.

23scidoo

So, he made up..lol..

Ledbetterman10

23scidoo said:

So, he made up..lol..

I figured it was bullshit early on when my Aunt died (not from Covid) and we couldn’t have a funeral at the funeral home down the street from her house, because that’d be just too risky with Covid in the air. But George Floyd got three funerals in three different cities that same month. 

Speaking of Floyd, when there were protests all over following his death, Fauci was asked by some republican congressman if he’d recommend against these protests because they violate his social distancing recommendations. Remember, it was imperative that we “stop the spread.” Of course he refused. In every other instance of American life at the time, he recommended social distancing; stay six feet away from each other. But hundreds of people all beside each other in the streets was fine. 

mrussel1

Ledbetterman10 said:

23scidoo said:

So, he made up..lol..

I figured it was bullshit early on when my Aunt died (not from Covid) and we couldn’t have a funeral at the funeral home down the street from her house, because that’d be just too risky with Covid in the air. But George Floyd got three funerals in three different cities that same month. 

Speaking of Floyd, when there were protests all over following his death, Fauci was asked by some republican congressman if he’d recommend against these protests because they violate his social distancing recommendations. Remember, it was imperative that we “stop the spread.” Of course he refused. In every other instance of American life at the time, he recommended social distancing; stay six feet away from each other. But hundreds of people all beside each other in the streets was fine. 

That's a gotcha question and you know it.  I wouldn't answer specific funeral level questions or protests either, and get dragged into that political debate.  If I was him, I would have repeated the guidance.  

Merkin Baller

Ledbetterman10 said:

23scidoo said:

So, he made up..lol..

I figured it was bullshit early on when my Aunt died (not from Covid) and we couldn’t have a funeral at the funeral home down the street from her house, because that’d be just too risky with Covid in the air. But George Floyd got three funerals in three different cities that same month. 

Speaking of Floyd, when there were protests all over following his death, Fauci was asked by some republican congressman if he’d recommend against these protests because they violate his social distancing recommendations. Remember, it was imperative that we “stop the spread.” Of course he refused. In every other instance of American life at the time, he recommended social distancing; stay six feet away from each other. But hundreds of people all beside each other in the streets was fine. 

Fauci didn't recommend against the trump rallies either; he did however have the following to say in response to Gym Jordan's fishing expedition: 

“I’m not favoring anybody over anybody. I’m just making a statement that is a broad statement, avoid crowds of any type, no matter where you are, because that leads to the acquisition and transmission.”

“I don’t judge one crowd versus another crowd. When you’re in a crowd, particularly if you’re not wearing a mask, that induces the spread"

https://www.fox5ny.com/news/i-dont-judge-one-crowd-vs-another-fauci-clashes-with-gop-lawmaker-over-protests-during-coronavirus

Ledbetterman10

mrussel1 said:

Ledbetterman10 said:

23scidoo said:

So, he made up..lol..

I figured it was bullshit early on when my Aunt died (not from Covid) and we couldn’t have a funeral at the funeral home down the street from her house, because that’d be just too risky with Covid in the air. But George Floyd got three funerals in three different cities that same month. 

Speaking of Floyd, when there were protests all over following his death, Fauci was asked by some republican congressman if he’d recommend against these protests because they violate his social distancing recommendations. Remember, it was imperative that we “stop the spread.” Of course he refused. In every other instance of American life at the time, he recommended social distancing; stay six feet away from each other. But hundreds of people all beside each other in the streets was fine. 

That's a gotcha question and you know it.  I wouldn't answer specific funeral level questions or protests either, and get dragged into that political debate.  If I was him, I would have repeated the guidance.  

I’m just saying that the implementation of Covid rules by the government didn’t seem consistent with any sort of science. That’s why my Aunt  gets no funeral and George Floyd gets three. You can be defensive of Fauci and that’s fine. He did repeat the “guidance” in that instance I mentioned, and said it’s not for him to determine if protests should be shut down. But all the shut downs and whatnot start with his initial social distancing recommendations. He was like the blast-off point for the government to enact poor policies. And now, he’s testifying to not even knowing of any scientific studies that supports the mask and social-distancing mandates

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/fauci-it-sort-of-just-appeared-that-six-feet-is-going-to-be-the-distance/

mrussel1

Ledbetterman10 said:

mrussel1 said:

Ledbetterman10 said:

23scidoo said:

So, he made up..lol..

I figured it was bullshit early on when my Aunt died (not from Covid) and we couldn’t have a funeral at the funeral home down the street from her house, because that’d be just too risky with Covid in the air. But George Floyd got three funerals in three different cities that same month. 

Speaking of Floyd, when there were protests all over following his death, Fauci was asked by some republican congressman if he’d recommend against these protests because they violate his social distancing recommendations. Remember, it was imperative that we “stop the spread.” Of course he refused. In every other instance of American life at the time, he recommended social distancing; stay six feet away from each other. But hundreds of people all beside each other in the streets was fine. 

That's a gotcha question and you know it.  I wouldn't answer specific funeral level questions or protests either, and get dragged into that political debate.  If I was him, I would have repeated the guidance.  

I’m just saying that the implementation of Covid rules by the government didn’t seem consistent with any sort of science. That’s why my Aunt  gets no funeral and George Floyd gets three. You can be defensive of Fauci and that’s fine. He did repeat the “guidance” in that instance I mentioned, and said it’s not for him to determine if protests should be shut down. But all the shut downs and whatnot start with his initial social distancing recommendations. He was like the blast-off point for the government to enact poor policies. And now, he’s testifying to not even knowing of any scientific studies that supports the mask and social-distancing mandates

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/fauci-it-sort-of-just-appeared-that-six-feet-is-going-to-be-the-distance/

It was up to the administration to determine the final guidance, informed by the NIH and CDC.  They are doctors and it's not their job to balance the other considerations.  The Trump admin could have reverted to the guidance across most of Europe, which I think was 1 meter.  They chose to follow the more conservative guidance.  

By contrast, soon after Walensky took over as director of the CDC in 2021, she soon lowered the guidance to 3 feet and a mask in schools, which enabled much of the reopening.  

BTW, the National Review is failing to include other parts of that discussion, that this 1955 study on droplets was part of how the CDC got there.  https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK143281/  While the NRO is better than most right wing reporting, it still has its clear biases.  From the WashPo.  Notice that the CDC started at 10, and the White House pushed back to 6.  They could have pushed back to 3.  

It’s still not clear who at the CDC settled on the six-foot distance; the agency has repeatedly declined to specify the authors of the guidance, which resembled its recommendations on how to avoid contracting the flu. A CDC spokesperson credited a team of experts, who drew from research such as a 1955 study on respiratory droplets. In his book, Gottlieb wrote that the Trump White House pushed back on the CDC’s initial recommendation of 10 feet of social distance, saying it would be too difficult to implement.

Gern Blansten

Honestly...continuing to bitch about Fauci is just ignorant. As evidenced by these hearings coming up. Bullshit smoke screens.

Ledbetterman10

Oh yeah, Trump’s a big part of the problem too. For all his bravado about being in charge and being against this sort of government overreach, he sure let federal bureaucrats enact polices that he himself would now never take any accountability for. Mandating military members get the vaccine for example. 

Gern Blansten

Hilarious...Raskin just said something like "I bet you (Fauci) wish they were treating you like a convicted felon because they seem to admire convicted felons".

Halifax2TheMax

I look forward to the next, “AH HA!” moment. Coming soon, 3, 2, 1…..And keep putting your faith in Gym Jordan. It’ll serve you well.

Opinion 

 Another Committee to Confirm Our Conspiracy Theories comes up short

Republicans could not prove that Anthony Fauci influenced the CIA on the covid lab leak theory.

Old conspiracy theories never die. They just fade into the congressional record.

Last fall, Rep. Brad Wenstrup (R-Ohio), chairman of the Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic, made an incendiary public accusation that, “according to information gathered by the select subcommittee,” Anthony Fauci “was escorted into Central Intelligence Agency Headquarters — without a record of entry — and participated in the analysis to ‘influence’ the agency’s review” to say that covid-19 did not originate from a lab leak. “Wenstrup reveals new allegations,” his news release boasted.

Another Republican on the panel, Rep. Richard McCormick (Ga.) declared definitively: “We now know that Fauci had a secret meeting with the CIA.”

Fox News, the New York Post and the rest of the right-wing conspiracy machine ran with it. And then — nothing. The subcommittee came up with no evidence to support the claim, supposedly made by a whistleblower, and nothing to challenge Fauci’s testimony that he hadn’t been to the CIA in 20 years. Appearing before the panel in a public hearing on Monday, Fauci, now retired after decades leading the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, ridiculed the idea that “I was parachuted into the CIA like Jason Bourne and told the CIA that they should really not be talking about a lab leak.”

So what did committee Republicans do after their Fauci-to-CIA conspiracy theory collapsed? They pretended it never happened. The Republican staff director, Mitch Benzine, during his time to question Fauci at the hearing, announced: “That was not an allegation made by the committee.”

Why would anyone have thought otherwise?

This follows a pattern. The Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government, after holding several hearings that failed to produce anything other than warmed-over allegations about the so-called deep state, was panned even by right-wing media. The Oversight Committee investigation of Joe Biden’s “corruption” failed so thoroughly to find even a trace of wrongdoing by the president that Republicans have had to quietly shelve their impeachment ambitions.

On the covid panel, Republican House members had promised many a bombshell over the last year and a half.

“Evidence is mounting that American tax dollars helped develop COVID & Dr. Fauci purposely suppressed the lab leak theory to cover it up,” alleged Nicole Malliotakis (N.Y.).

“While many lost their loved ones, their businesses, and livelihoods, Dr. Fauci made millions,” Michael Cloud (Tex.) accused.

Covid “was manufactured in a lab funded by Fauci,” asserted Marjorie Taylor Greene (Ga.).

Yeah, no.

Documents and testimony the panel gathered over 18 months, while finding misbehavior by a grant recipient and by an adviser to Fauci, produced nothing to substantiate these wild allegations. The United States did not fund research that created the pathogen. Fauci didn’t lie about the U.S. role in “gain of function” research at the laboratory in Wuhan, China. He didn’t try to suppress the lab leak theory, or bribe people to reject it. He didn’t get rich off the pandemic, either — although he testified that he earned about $120 a year from an antibody he developed years ago.

And, so, when Fauci appeared before Congress on Monday, Republicans on the panel hit him with whatever else they could come up with.

Malliotakis scolded him for “cruel, horrific animal research” at NIH on beagles, piglets and rabbits.

"I’m puzzled as to what that has to do with the origins of covid,” Fauci replied.

Greene didn’t care what it had to do with covid. “As a dog lover, I want to tell you this is disgusting and evil,” she said, recommending “prison” for Fauci. She further informed the scientist that she would address him as “Mr. Fauci, because you’re not Doctor.” Democrats objected, and the committee spent several minutes bickering over proper decorum.

The dispute about Fauci’s honorific (he’s an M.D.) was all the more absurd because the chairman, Wenstrup, made a point in his opening statement of stating that “I am a physician” who during covid was "researching with another physician in Ohio to try and understand the pathology.”

Wenstrup did not mention that he is a podiatrist. Was he researching covid’s impact on the metatarsals?

But the constant repetition of the conspiracy theories is anything but amusing for, as Fauci testified, it has caused endless harassment of him and his family, including the arrests of two people “on their way to kill me.” He said he needs full-time security.

Yet Republicans on the panel, rather than focusing on lessons about masks, vaccines, and school and business closures that could save lives in the future, kept returning to the same conspiracy theories that are endangering Fauci’s life in the present. And Fauci kept batting them down.

He informed Debbie Lesko (Ariz.) that “you said about four or five things … that were just not true.”

He advised Jim Jordan (Ohio) to “look at the facts.”

And to Benzine, the staff director, Fauci offered a chuckle and a simple critique: “I know where you’re going, and you’re not going to get there.”

They never do.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2024/06/03/fauci-testimony-congress-covid-conspiracy/