One 225G is found, outcome unknown.
42% of the UK deposit (21 of 50) carries the Receptor Binding Domain change of 225E also found in Almaty, Kazakhstan during that timeframe. At that time, only 13 206T/225E combinations had been cited in this pandemic. Reporting of these UK sequences in a timely manner would have more than doubled the case counts with the RBD polymorphism and raised flags for investigative focus.
An RBD revision emerging at this rate and being withheld from public scientific discussion is as intellectually shortsighted as the partial reporting from the US on the Duke TamiFlu Resistant cluster in October that we are only learning today also transmitted 225G? TamiFlu Resistance leading to fatalities and 1918 Second Wave RBD revisions that are transmitting . . . no report? A doubling of 225E cases with 21 instances in a major European international travel hub and no report?
These "Science for Hire" stealthy corporate practices now being employed in the public arena leave the average citizen without the information needed to make proper health decisions. All "science" may soon come to us via PR-driven press releases. Fabrications and crafty wording as we've seen with this pandemic may become so very honed that even sheer disinformation will be applauded as fact by the misled public.
22% of the UK deposit (11 of 50) carries the HA syn413K from the cross-linked background. The UK count for the cross segment linking marker, NA syn407V, cannot be presented today because no Neuraminidase segments were published. The exclusivity pattern continues with no 225E strains on the cross-linked background and the single UK 225G case from July does not fall on the cross-linked background (as expected due to the early timing of the 206T/225G pattern).
Evidence is suggestive that as the number of sequences identified on the cross-segment linkages grows, academic honesty may be trending steeply downward. A pattern of withholding one or the other segment (HA/NA) or, more oddly, withholding only the required portion of the pairing segment is evident in more than 100 recent samples that are essential for study. We find an 80% to 100% blanketing of one marker in some locations and a mysterious missing block of segments or, at times, the portion of the segments for the second marker?
May we please review the HA 1281 and NA 1221 for recently published sequences?
If 225G was confirmed transmitting as early as October, is correlated to fatal outcomes (50%-80%), is now documented across the globe previously and presently, was part of the Second Wave in 1918, is linked to a vaccine escape event and is correlated to the cross-segment linked background, do we need further evidence to increase surveillance and improve data transparency to the science community and the paying public?
At the end of the day, late data is demonstrating that as of July 2009 the UK was trending ahead of many European countries with 66% of this deposit (33 of 50) showing either an RBD revision or the silent HA marker for the cross-linked background.
Please visit GeneWurx.com for insight into the latest published studies.