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

UFS’s Unit for Children’s Rights instrumental in helping human trafficked victim
2010-03-29

Adv. Beatri Kruger.
Photo: Leonie Bolleurs
“Wheeling and dealing is part of our daily life. But what if the ‘product’ bought or sold is not a spanner or a cell phone, but a living human being? Disturbing news came to the fore... apart from other places in the country, and for that matter all over the world, it was discovered that people are treated like commodities here in Bloemfontein as well,” said Adv. Beatri Kruger from the Unit for Children’s Rights at the University of the Free State (UFS).

Adv. Kruger was instrumental in completing and availing the first comprehensive Research Report on Human Trafficking in South Africa to the public on 23 March 2010. As a member of the Reference Group advising on interim research reports on human trafficking, she contributed to the report. The report proves to be an extremely valuable tool for, among others, government departments and non-governmental organisations that use it as a guideline in planning interventions to combat human trafficking.

The Unit for Children’s Rights is also one of the founding members of the Free State Human Trafficking Forum (FHF). To react on and fight the disturbing reality of human trafficking more efficiently, a number of concerned role players such as Child Welfare and other non-governmental organisations, police officials, prosecutors, social workers, health practitioners, private businesses, churches and community organisations joined forces and formed the FHF. The Unit for Children’s Rights hosts monthly meetings at the UFS to facilitate the coordination of this multi-disciplinary counter-trafficking team.

Adv. Kruger is very excited about some of the successes of the FHF; such as the story of Soma (not her real name). This Indian woman was recruited in India by an Indian couple who are staying in South Africa, by promising her a good job in South Africa. However, instead of finding the promised job, Soma was extensively exploited for labour purposes. With the help of a “good Samaritan” she managed to escape from the perpetrators and fled to the police. Soma was removed to ensure her safety and accommodated in a safe place in Bloemfontein. Counselling and other services were rendered to her by an organisation which is also a member of the FHF. One of the challenges facing Soma and the service providers was that Soma speaks a foreign dialect and for weeks a trusted interpreter could not be found.

This obstacle rendered communication with her to the bare minimum. The perpetrators were arrested but unfortunately the new comprehensive counter-trafficking law is not in force yet. Therefore the perpetrators could only be convicted of some offences in the Immigration Act. However, due to good police investigation followed by shrewd consultations, the perpetrators agreed to pay for the victim’s return flight to India as well as for the flight ticket of the investigating officer to escort her to safety. The Unit for Children’s Rights did networking with Ms Maria Nikolovska of the International Organisation for Migration (IOM), who agreed to assist in the safe reintegration of Soma in India. Soma is now on her way back home.

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