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 Council elects new Chairperson
2017-01-27

Description: Mr Willem Louw and Nthabeleng Rammile Tags: Mr Willem Louw and Nthabeleng Rammile

Mr Willem Louw, new Chairperson of the Council
of the University of the Free State, and Dr Nthabeleng
Rammile, new Vice-Chairperson.
Photo: Stephen Collett

The Council of the University of the Free State (UFS) elected Mr Willem Louw as the new Chairperson during a special meeting on Friday 20 January 2017. He was Vice-Chairperson of the Council since 13 March 2015. Dr Nthabeleng Rammile was elected Vice-Chairperson at the same meeting, making her the first woman in the history of the university elected to this position.

The election of Mr Louw comes after the announcement by Justice Ian van der Merwe at a Council meeting on 2 December 2016 that he will be stepping down as Chairperson on 31 December 2016.

Mr Louw has served on the Council since 11 September 2009 and was elected as member of the Executive Committee of the Council on 18 November 2011. He furthermore serves on the Council’s subcommittees for Audit and Risk Management, and Honorary Degrees.

In accepting his election as Chairperson, Mr Louw said that he appreciates the trust Council has bestowed on him. “It is a privilege and honour to lead Council and I look forward to the challenge. With the support of Dr Rammile and the rest of the Council, I endeavour to ensure that the university management is assisted in the governance of the university and that the Council plays its governance role fully at all times,” he said.

“The UFS is privileged to have Mr Louw and Dr Rammile leading its Council at such a crucial time in the South African higher-education sector. Their combined experience will be of great benefit to the university community,” said Prof Nicky Morgan, Acting Vice-Chancellor and Rector of the UFS.

Mr Louw is an Associate of the Transnet Centre for Business Management of Projects at the University of Stellenbosch Business School and a non-executive Director of Group Five Limited. He was previously Managing Director of the technology business unit and a member of Group Management at Sasol, where he worked from 1985 until 2011. He is a member of the South African Council for the Project and Construction Management Professions and a Fellow of the South African Academy of Engineering. Mr Louw received his Bachelor’s and Master’s degrees in Civil Engineering from Stellenbosch University and his MDP (Management Development Programme in Project Management) from UNISA. He is currently enrolled for a PhD in Business Management and Administration at the University of Stellenbosch Business School.

Dr Rammile has served on the Council as representative of the religious communities since 1 January 2016. She is also member of the Council subcommittees for Audit and Risk Management, and Naming. She obtained a PhD in Brand Management at the UFS, where she also lectured in the Department of Business Management from 2003 to 2014. She is a pastor at Global Reconciliation, where she is responsible for women’s ministry, community outreach projects, and multimedia.

Mr Louw will serve as Chairperson of Council until 31 December 2018, and Dr Rammile will serve as Vice-Chairperson until 12 March 2018.

Released by:
Lacea Loader (Director: Communication and Brand Management)
Telephone: +27 51 401 2584 | +27 83 645 2454
Email: news@ufs.ac.za | loaderl@ufs.ac.za
Fax: +27 51 444 6393

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