With regard to, "This Covid 19 virus also has a series of 4 positive amino acids in a row. This just does not happen in nature." It would appear this statement is a quote taken from an article in the noted scientific journal, the Daily Mail. It is wholly incorrect and misleading.
As reported in the link below, the biologist Michael Eisen dismissed the Daily Mail article as “unbelievable bull****”, noting that far from being unusual, “33% of human proteins have four consecutive positive-charged amino acids”.
Further refutals to the Mail's quote can be read in responses to Eisen's tweet https://twitter.com/mbeisen/status/1398735715509231619
Just so we're clear, I'm not having a go at you or your contributions to this board, I'm just keen to get the science right.
I posted a link to that grants spreadsheet and also the Foundation's investments a few weeks ago and what still baffles me is, if the Foundation is recording all of those grants and investments, why would it have radio silence over SAR?
I'm only playing devil's advocate here but wouldn't the RNS be considered misleading if it were the Foundation rather than an individual? The only reason might be if one of the Gates invested directly rather than via their Foundation. But then why do that unless it would be to avoid having to note it officially via the Foundation?
Whilst it'd be great if Gates was on board with us, it just seems so odd that they are being so quiet about it.
A riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma.
Personally, I still think it's Thoth!
Further to my earlier post from New Scientist, it continues -
Some studies suggest that variants such as delta are also evolving the ability to spread directly from cell to cell, rather than via the blood, enabling them to dodge antibodies. This process can cause cells to fuse together, seriously damaging tissues.
“This would be consistent with increased cell-to-cell spread leading to higher virulence,” says Shan-Lu Liu at the Ohio State University. However, his team has only demonstrated this type of spread in the lab, not in infected individuals, he cautions.
Another reason why some viruses evolve to cause milder infections is because they become optimised to target our upper airways, as pointed out by Amalio Telenti at Scripps Research and his colleagues in a recent paper in Nature. In the upper airway, viruses shed by cells are much more likely to be breathed out and infect others, when compared with viruses that zero in on our lungs. But the receptor targeted by SARS-CoV-2 is also present lower down in the respiratory system, so this doesn’t apply.
On the plus side, a growing number of studies show that several vaccines still provide excellent protection against severe disease and death even if they are slightly less effective at preventing infection by new variants such as delta. The expectation is that this protection will only be lost slowly. “The erosion of antibody recognition is gradual,” says Bloom. “It will likely take many mutations accumulated over multiple years.”
If that is the case, in high-income countries at least, there will be plenty of time to roll out booster shots before any variants completely escape any vaccine. Some vaccine companies have already developed booster shots that should be more effective against new variants.
It might also be possible to develop vaccines that provide protection against a much broader range of variants.
Despite vaccines being our best bet against new variants, so far only about 13.8 per cent of the world’s population is fully vaccinated.
Many countries now face their greatest threat during the pandemic, says Katzourakis. “With the delta variant [spreading] in some parts of the world, things are about to get a lot worse.”
13.8% of the world’s population is fully vaccinated as of 26 July.
Glad I'm invested in Sareum rather some crypto ponzi scheme.
Excerpt from New Scientist article 31/7/21:
Higher infectiousness is the most worrying trait that the virus can evolve, because it makes it much harder to control. A more transmissible virus will kill more people even if it is no more virulent, because it will infect more individuals.
Higher transmissibility also means a higher proportion of a population needs to be immune to achieve the herd immunity threshold, which is perhaps now as high as 90 per cent compared with around 70 per cent for the original virus.
What’s more, infectiousness is often linked to immune evasion. If a virus replicates faster, says Gupta, it takes more antibodies to mop up all the viruses, which means an immune response that works against earlier variants could be overwhelmed.
The good news is there is a limit to how much more transmissible the virus can become. “I think at some point transmissibility will plateau – the virus won’t keep getting more transmissible forever,” says Jesse Bloom at the University of Washington in Seattle.
However, that might take many more years or even decades. “I’d be cautious about saying that we are nearing its limit. We don’t know where that is,” says Gupta. “At the moment, the virus is basically saying there is no end to this.”
Some have suggested that there is also a limit to how much the coronavirus can evolve to evade immunity. The most effective antibodies bind to the parts of the outer spike protein of the virus that help it infect cells, so it is thought that these parts cannot change much if the virus is to remain able to do this.
The bad news is that new work by Bloom suggests that this belief is wrong and there is no limit to how far the virus can mutate to escape antibodies. “I expect [this kind of] change to continue forever,” he says.
Until this work, it wasn’t clear whether the pre-existing human coronaviruses that are one of the causes of the common cold persist in people because our immunity to them is short-lived or because they keep evolving to evade our immunity. By analysing blood samples from as long ago as the 1980s, Bloom’s team has now shown that their persistence is due to the continual emergence of so-called escape variants.
If SARS-CoV-2 evolves like these other human coronaviruses, it will continue to acquire mutations that enable it to escape the recognition of antibodies, says Bloom. “I don’t expect any real end to this process.” Other viruses, such as flu, never run out of ways to dodge our immunity, he says.
Ain't mother nature a *****?
SOG - I shall get a t-shirt printed for you declaring 'Bats and Pangolins, my ar5e'. As I'm not sure which part of Thurso you're currently in (oh the irony if it's Pennyland) so I'll leave it behind the cistern in the second cubicle of the gents at Thurso train station.
Hi SOG - no worries, I wasn't expecting an instant answer!
Thanks for the comprehensive response. Yes, it's essential that SAR are able to position themselves in such a way that we have options for the future. Will we see another HNW add to the pot in the next week or two? I expect so. Will we have access to the additional £30m? Yes, in due course.
As others have alluded, unreported trials may already have started and our postion can only grow stronger from here on in.
My other holding has recently been underwater but appears to be heading back to the surface in the coming days. The decision to go all-in on SAR is very much at the forefront of my thinking. As Thoth has pointed out, if you have complete conviction in a company then why wouldn't you go all in?
Buckle up those seatbelts, it's gonna get wild!
Hi Mafuta - do you mean this? https://www.gov.uk/guidance/elect-a-qualifying-company-for-tax-exemption-on-uk-capital-gains
It's all just speculation but rather than sell the whole company as some predict, do you really envisage SAR wholly financing something like this? Or would it be more likely they go into partnership along the lines of, say, a 40:60 revenue split e.g. you make our pills and market/sell them at a max price of £10 per pill? I'm sure some large pharma would take 60% of multiple billions rather than have 100% of nothing.
Oh to be a fly on the wall at Sareum HQ.
Basser - where have you read that most AIM shares are exempt from CGT? They are exempt from stamp duty, not CGT as far as I'm aware.
CGT is due the moment you realise the gain (that means the day you sell your shares) and your gain for the tax year is over the threshold i.e. you sell shares in your trading account and any profit over £12k (or whatever the tax threshold is) is liable immediately for CGT. Some people think as long as they keep the money in their trading account they're ok. They are not.
Anything in a Stocks & Shares ISA is bulletproof, dividends included.
Once we know what the secret patent is, do you think that will be the final catalyst for takeover offers?
For all we know the BoD have already received figures written on scraps of paper slipped under their door but the next patent could be what they're waiting on before actively entertaining offers from prospective pharmas.
Thoth - one side effect of getting covid appears to be you've turned into some sort of soothsayer. As predicted https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jul/25/seriously-ill-young-people-in-current-covid-admissions-expert-warns
Your next prediction is 17p by Friday. Someone make sure that man gets an extra ration of Wotsits.
To be honest I'm not sure if responding to any of Sierra's tweets has the slightest impact.
Will their BoD read their own Twitter feed? Doubtful - why would they when they already know what the business is (or isn't) doing?
As for their media team posting the tweets, would you expect any of them to have the slightest idea as to what 737 is?
What we need is some sort of Ray Winstone character to go round to Sierra's HQ, sorry, 'gaff', and catch Tilly as he's getting out of his car, "listen 'ere, sunshine, fings could get a bit tricky for you if ya don't get your act together pronto. Now I've got a friend, goes by the name Knuckles, yeah, and he's got an interest in medical matters....well, 'e breaks bones...an' not in a nice way either." etc.