Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
01 December 2021 | Story André Damons | Photo Charl Devenish
Prof Felicity Burt, expert in arbovirology in the Division of Virology at the University of the Free State (UFS) and the National Health Laboratory Service (NHLS).

Even though not much is yet known about the new COVID-19 variant, Omicron, the presence of a high number of mutations – more than 30 – in the spike protein of the variant raises concern. 

This is according to Prof Felicity Burt, expert in arbovirology in the Division of Virology at the University of the Free State (UFS) and the National Health Laboratory Service (NHLS). According to her, although Omicron is highly transmissible, further epidemiological data is required to determine if it is more transmissible than the Delta variant.

On Friday 26 November, the World Health Organisation (WHO) declared the new variant, B.1.1.529, a variant of concern (VOC) and assigned it the name Omicron. This assignation was based on advice from the Technical Advisory Group on SARS-CoV-2 Virus Evolution (TAG-VE), an independent group of experts responsible for monitoring and evaluating emerging variants. The following are considered when categorising a newly identified variant – are there mutations (changes in the viral genes) that are known, or that have the potential, to affect the characteristics of the virus, such as transmissibility, disease severity, immune escape, diagnostic or therapeutic escape; is there significant community transmission or increasing prevalence in multiple countries over time; are the public health and social measures effective against the variant.

With each new variant, the public health concerns are dependent on the transmissibility of the variant, the ability of the virus to escape immunity from natural infection or from vaccination, and the severity of illness caused by the variant or any change in clinical presentation. In addition, the ability of current diagnostic assays to adequately detect the variant and effectiveness of public health and social measures, must be considered.

We know, we don’t know 

Answers are derived from existing epidemiological data, laboratory research, and theoretical considerations. Although we can make some predictions based on the mutations identified and the location of these mutations, the epidemiological data and laboratory research are essential to answer with certainty, and this can take some time. The presence of a high number of mutations – more than 30 – in the spike protein of Omicron, raises concern. What do we know and what don’t we know?

“What we don’t know is whether these mutations have changed the severity of disease caused by the virus. We do know that the diagnostic PCR tests currently used in South Africa are not compromised by the presence of these mutations, and in fact, one of the molecular assays commonly used to target three regions of the virus, can be used as a rapid biomarker to detect the variant. Although sequencing of the genome is used as confirmation, this assay provides a useful rapid biomarker that can be used to detect the presence of the variant; subsequently, PCR results have shown that the variant is likely already present in most provinces in the country,” says Prof Burt, who currently holds an NRF-DST South African Research Chair in vector-borne and zoonotic pathogens research. 

There is also preliminary epidemiological evidence that reinfections are occurring. According to her, the occurrence of reinfections suggests some degree of immune escape; however, we do not know the extent of immune escape or the contribution of waning immunity towards reinfections. “Laboratory tests, in which the live virus is tested against samples from both recovered and vaccinated people, are required to confirm whether existing antibodies can neutralise the variant. The tests for neutralising antibodies require specialised facilities and is dependent on culturing the virus. 
“These tests are already underway in the country and should provide more information in the coming weeks. 

Neutralising antibody tests, although time consuming, are relatively easy to perform compared to tests to determine the role played by other arms of the immune response.”

Vaccines still best option to fight COVID-19

Prof Burt, who has worked on viral haemorrhagic fevers and arboviruses at the National Institute for Communicable Diseases (NICD), says it is known that vaccines are highly effective in reducing the severity of disease and fatalities in individuals infected with other variants, such as Beta and Delta, despite mutations in critical regions of the spike gene in the variants. 

The epidemiological data acquired from cases and the results of laboratory tests for neutralising capability will contribute towards understanding the effectiveness of the vaccine against Omicron. The questions regarding severity of the disease and level of protection from previous infection and vaccines are priority areas to understand the impact of this variant. The early identification of the variant and the initiation of vital research and data analysis highlight the importance of genomic surveillance.

Cases of Omicron have already been confirmed in Israel, the United Kingdom, Europe, Australia, and Africa. Travel restrictions have previously been shown to be ineffective in stopping the geographical spread of new variants, merely delaying the inevitable, and at significant cost to economies. “We know with certainty that vaccination has reduced the severity of illness and death with previous variants; even in the face of reduced neutralising ability, there was sufficient protection to save lives,” says Prof Burt.  

She concluded, “Globally, the impact of vaccination is evident in countries experiencing fourth waves, with a reduced number of deaths compared to previous waves. Many decisions in life are based on a risk assessment and consideration of the pros and cons. Vaccines save lives. Vaccines definitely boost waning immune responses from natural infection.” 

“This is certainly not the time to reject the vaccine based on perceived risks from inaccurate social media spreading harmful disinformation compared to the known risks associated with contracting COVID-19 and the known protection against severe disease afforded by the vaccines.”

News Archive

Geology researcher wins international photographic contest
2017-06-02

Description: Dr Elizaveta Kovaleva Tags: Dr Elizaveta Kovaleva

In this winning photo, “Movement of the ancient sand”,
Dr Matthew Huber, postdoctoral research fellow in the
Department of Geology at UFS, is scaling an outcrop
of sandstone (former sand dunes) in the Zion National
Park in the US.
Photo: Dr Elizaveta Kovaleva


Dr Elizaveta Kovaleva and Dr Matthew Huber, postdoctoral research fellows in the Department of Geology at the University of the Free State (UFS), attended the European Geosciences Union (EGU) General Assembly in Vienna, Austria in April 2017, where Dr Kovaleva was declared a winner of the EGU photo contest with a photograph entitled “Movement of the ancient sand”.

Submitting the winning photo
Each participant could submit up to three photos to participate in the contest before the conference. From all the photographs 10 were selected and displayed for the entire week at the assembly so participants could vote for their three favourite photos. At the end of the week three winners were selected. The prize winners received a free EGU book of their choice, free registration for next year’s EGU and an option to judge the photo competition next year. The photos will be printed on postcards next year, so all participants can send them wherever they want around the globe.

“The picture was taken in the Zion National Park in the US. Myself and Dr Huber were travelling around the western states, visiting national parks. The person in the picture is Dr Huber,” said Dr Kovaleva.

Dr Kovaleva was also invited to participate - as a recently published author - in a workshop, called: ”Publishing in EGU journals: Solid Earth and Earth Surface Dynamics – Meet the Editors”.

At the assembly, Dr Kovaleva attended sessions on Tectonics and Structural Geology as well as on Geochemistry, Mineralogy, Petrology and Volcanology. These sessions were especially interesting in the scope of her research and are directly related to it. “I am a metamorphic petrologist, and with my PhD, I essentially studied microstructures. At the moment, I am studying the Vredefort impact crater, which has experienced both metamorphism and deformation,” she said.

“The winning photos will be printed on postcards,
so all participants can send them wherever they
want around the globe”.

Building scientific connections
For both researchers, the assembly was an opportunity to meet former colleagues and professors from universities all over the world and shake hands with authors whose papers and work they were familiar with, but had never met in person.

“EGU is a perfect opportunity to build scientific connections and relationships, advertise your research and start new collaborations and projects,” said Dr Kovaleva.

The EGU General Assembly 2017 was a great success, with 4 849 oral, 11 312 poster, and 1 238 PICO presentations. Some 649 unique scientific sessions, together with 88 short courses and 322 side events, created an interesting programme. At the conference 14 496 scientists from 107 countries participated, of whom 53% were under the age of 35. Thirty one were from South Africa.

We use cookies to make interactions with our websites and services easy and meaningful. To better understand how they are used, read more about the UFS cookie policy. By continuing to use this site you are giving us your consent to do this.

Accept