Categories
Saved Web Pages

‘Paranoid’ crypto millionaire Nikolai Mushegian drowns in Puerto Rico

64407847-0-image-a-8_1668092435185.jpg

Published: 15:03 GMT, 10 November 2022 | Updated: 15:03 GMT, 10 November 2022

Nikolai Mushegian, 29, died on October 28, hours after posting his final tweet

A ‘paranoid’ cryptocurrency millionaire drowned on a Puerto Rico beach after tweeting that he feared the CIA and Mossad were going to murder him. 

Nikolai Mushegian, 29, died on October 28, hours after posting his final tweet. 

The troubled young millionaire had a history of mental health problems and his family do not believe there was any foul play. 

In a tweet hours before he died, he said: ‘CIA and Mossad and pedo elite are running some kind of sex trafficking entrapment blackmail ring out of Puerto Rico and Caribbean islands. 

‘They are going to frame me with a laptop planted by my ex [girlfriend] who was a spy. They will torture me to death.’ 

However some in the cryptocurrency community in Puerto Rico are suspicious of the timing of his death. 

He was discovered by a surfer in the water at Ashford Beach on October 29, fully clothed and carrying his wallet. 

Mushegian was found in the water by a surfer in Puerto Rico, hours after posting this unhinged tweet 

A surfer spotted Nikolai’s body floating in the water near Ashford Avenue in Condado on October 28 

Brock Pierce, another cryptocurrency entrepreneur who is well known in the community, told The New York Post that he was satisfied Nikolai’s death was not suspicious after speaking to his family in Florida. 

‘His mother clarified that his death had nothing to do with his [conspiracy] tweets. 

‘He was a beautiful man and a child at heart. He was also an incredible visionary, I don’t call people brilliant very often but Nikolai was brilliant. 

‘And brilliant people sometimes walk the edge of insanity,’ he said. 

Nikolai’s family had become so concerned for his welfare that his father had gone to stay with him in Condado, Puerto Rico, where he is said to have lived in a $6million house. 

The young man’s death comes at a time when the cryptocurrency industry is in flux. 

Ameen Soleimani, the CEO of Spankchain, is among those who are suspicious of his death 

FTX, the crypto trading platform, is on the brink of collapse and desperately awaiting a bailout. 

It was reported that Binance had offered to prop up the platform with a cash bailout, but the company has since backed out. 

Nikolai’s friends in the community were stunned by his death. 

‘Yea so Nikolai is still F*****G DEAD my money is on him being murdered he was found drowned 4 hours after his riskiest tweet ever. 

‘He had all year to drown randomly or be mugged, so it seems unlikely that his death was unrelated to his tweet…’ said Ameen Soleimani, the CEO of Spankchain. 

One of Nikolai’s friends also told the Post that his paranoia was partly informed. 

‘Some of his paranoia was based on fact. 

‘He’d discover things. He knew things. Nikolai got bored a lot with the mundane of life. He’d go after things, constantly putting himself in weird positions. It wasn’t for the money. 

‘He was interested in why things were the way they were and the corruption behind it.’ 

Police in Puerto Rico continue to investigate. 

Categories
Saved Web Pages

WSJ News Exclusive | U.S. Releases 9/11 Commission Interview With George W. Bush, Dick Cheney

social

A rough transcript of a 2004 interview George W. Bush and Dick Cheney gave to a government commission investigating the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks provides a glimpse of the former president’s and vice president’s views of the seminal event that defined their eight years in the White House.

The April 2004 interview with the bipartisan 9/11 commission, which took place in the Oval Office, included discussion of intelligence warnings before the attacks and the events that unfolded on the day of Sept. 11, according to the copy of the 31-page document. It also describes Mr. Bush acknowledging that Air Force One had poor communications while he was on the plane shortly after the attacks began—and Mr. Bush’s assertion that he gave Mr. Cheney the authority to shoot down commercial airliners that were unresponsive.

The newly declassified document was released to the public Wednesday.

Newsletter Sign-up

Scoops, analysis and insights driving Washington from the WSJ’s D.C. bureau.

“‘Yes, engage the enemy,’” Mr. Bush is described as saying he had told Mr. Cheney. “‘You have the authority to shoot down an airplane.’” In other instances, the document recounts Mr. Cheney repeatedly telling Mr. Bush, who was on a stage at a school in Florida when the attacks began, not to return to Washington.

“The president agreed, reluctantly,” the document says. “The president asked the vice president to take necessary steps and stay in close touch.”

The interview wasn’t recorded, but a note taker was present. The document was authorized for public release by the Interagency Security Classification Appeals Panel, a body of representatives from various federal departments. It contains few redactions and includes Mr. Bush’s reflections on threat reports he received in the spring and summer of 2001. It is not a verbatim transcript, but a “memorandum for the record” taken during the meeting.

The attacks, just eight months into Mr. Bush’s presidency, killed nearly 3,000 people in New York, the Pentagon and Shanksville, Pa., and prompted the Bush administration to launch wars in Afghanistan and Iraq that would last much of the next two decades. The government’s failure to foresee and prevent them led to the massive expansion of the U.S. security and intelligence apparatus, including the Department of Homeland Security, the Transportation Security Administration and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence.

In the interview, Mr. Bush repeatedly pushed back against suggestions from some of the 9/11 commissioners and others that he and his top advisers could have been more proactive against the terrorist group al Qaeda, which had already attacked two U.S. embassies in East Africa and the Navy destroyer USS Cole, before Sept. 11, 2001.

The president told the commission that an item in his Aug. 6, 2001, Presidential Daily Brief entitled “Bin Ladin Determined to Strike in U.S.,” about the al Qaeda leader, contained no information about al Qaeda cells inside the U.S. “There was no actionable intelligence on such a threat—not one,” the transcript quotes him as saying.

Photo: National Security Archive

That intelligence report, declassified in 2004, said the Federal Bureau of Investigation had information on “patterns of suspicious activity in this country consistent with preparations for hijacking or other types of suspicious attacks,” but provided no details.

Nor was there appetite for putting U.S. military forces inside Afghanistan, where al Qaeda was based, before the attacks, Mr. Bush said. He quoted British Prime Minister Tony Blair as telling him, had Mr. Bush suggested it, “I would have looked at you like a nut.”

Messrs. Bush and Cheney weren’t under oath, after the White House argued that would set a concerning precedent for future presidents. Afterward, Mr. Bush described the meeting as cordial, telling reporters he had answered every question.

A spokesman for Mr. Bush said the spokesman was unaware the release of the interview was forthcoming and declined to comment further. A spokesman for Mr. Cheney couldn’t be reached.

Philip Zelikow, executive director the 9/11 Commission, said that while much of the material from the interview was cited in the commission’s 2004 report, the memorandum gives the public a look at Mr. Bush’s discussion of the event that shaped his presidency, and at his relationship with Mr. Cheney.

“For a lot of people, it will be the first time they can really hear George Bush talking about the issue in a direct way under prolonged examination,” said Mr. Zelikow, who was present at the interview and drafted the memorandum. “It’s more the private Bush, not the public Bush.”

The interview, he said, undercuts a stereotype that Mr. Bush was deferential to, or even manipulated by, his vice president. Mr. Bush “took command from the start” in the session, he said.

The 9/11 Commission issued its final report in July 2004, concluding the U.S. government was ill-prepared to detect signs that al Qaeda was planning the attacks. The report was seen as a landmark document upon its release and became a bestseller—an unusual feat for a government document.

The 9/11 Commission document contains new insights into confusion at the highest levels of the U.S. government in the hours after the attacks.

Photo: Doug Mills/ASSOCIATED PRESS

Mr. Cheney thought the plane that crashed near Shanksville, United Airlines Flight 93, had been shot down by U.S. military aircraft. Mr. Bush was asked for authority to shoot down an airliner coming from Madrid, only to be told minutes later that the plane had actually landed in Madrid. Even on Air Force One, “communications were not as good as they should have been,” Mr. Bush told the commissioners.

In another revelation, the chairman of the commission, former New Jersey Gov. Thomas Kean, asked Messrs. Bush and Cheney if they were aware that the Secret Service had scrambled jets from Andrews Air Force Base outside of the military chain of command after the attacks.

“The president, surprised, asked the chairman to repeat ‘ordered by the Secret Service?’” the document states. “The chairman affirmed that. The president said he did not know about that.”

Last year, the Public Interest Declassification Board—a small panel of experts selected by presidents and congressional leaders to advocate for more transparency around government national-security information—sent a letter to President Biden recommending a list of 9/11 Commission documents to give priority to for declassification and public release. The board was involved in reviewing material for disclosure.

In addition to the interview with Messrs. Bush and Cheney, the board also requested the release of interviews with former President Bill Clinton, former Vice President Al Gore and former national security officials including Condoleezza Rice, and a summary and analysis of information in president’s daily briefs from the Clinton and Bush administrations on al Qaeda terrorism planning.

In a statement, Ezra Cohen, chair of the declassification board, said the release of the historical record would be “an important step towards additional public transparency.”

Mr. Cohen added the board hoped in the coming months that additional records about the attacks would be released, consistent with a Biden executive order signed last year ordering the review of still-classified 9/11 documents for potential public disclosure.

Write to Dustin Volz at dustin.volz@wsj.com and Warren P. Strobel at Warren.Strobel@wsj.com

Copyright ©2022 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 87990cbe856818d5eddac44c7b1cdeb8

Categories
Saved Web Pages

The winner of the midterms is not yet clear – but the loser is Donald Trump

2906.jpg?width=1200&height=630&quality=8

And the loser is … Donald J Trump. The identity of the winners of America’s midterm elections was not clear the morning after the night before – even at lunchtime on Wednesday the TV anchors could not tell their audiences whether Democrats or Republicans would be in control of the House of Representatives or Senate – but there was no such ambiguity over the fate of the man who continues to loom over US politics, even two years after his removal from the White House. Trump took a beating.

True to form, the former president had wanted this election to be all about him. His rallies, nominally staged to boost support for Republican candidates in whichever state he had landed in, were instead intensely focused on himself. At an outdoor event in Latrobe, Pennsylvania on Saturday night, for example, he spoke only fleetingly of the men running for governor or senator, devoting most of his two-hour speech either to relitigating the past – insisting, against all evidence, that the 2020 election was stolen from him – or hinting at a glorious future, talking up his prospects for retaking the presidency in 2024.

When he projected charts on to the giant screens, the graphics did not make a case for why Democrats deserved to lose their majorities in Congress, still less offer policy remedies for how the Republicans would combat inflation or crime. No, they showed a series of opinion polls, each one confirming how Trump remained the Republican faithful’s favourite, miles in front of any would-be rival.

As things turned out, the ex-president’s trademark narcissism was not so wide of the mark. In a way, the 2022 midterms were indeed all about him – just not in the way he had hoped.

Trump, like so many others, had assumed Tuesday would see a red wave rolling across America, sweeping Democrats out of both houses of Congress, toppling blue citadels in the most unexpected places: in the final weekend, there was sufficient panic in the highest reaches of the Democratic party that both Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton were dispatched to New York, one of the bluest states in the union, to shore up a governor who was suddenly thought to be in a tight race. (In fact, she won easily.)

Trump was poised to claim credit for a famous victory and to enjoy the fruits of it. He looked forward to a decisive Republican takeover of the House, one that would see the Democrat-led investigation into the attempted insurrection of 6 January 2021 abandoned, its place taken instead by multiple probes into the affairs of the Biden family. As one seasoned Democrat put it to me this week, “He’ll expect the House to operate as his law firm.”

But even if his party does eke out an eventual congressional win, there was no Republican tsunami. “Definitely not a Republican wave, that’s for darn sure,” admitted senator and tireless Trump sycophant Lindsey Graham.

That’s a surprise, and not only because it upended the Washington conventional wisdom. Heavy midterm defeat for the party of a first-term, incumbent president is seen as the norm, a pendulum effect all but governed by the laws of nature. Barack Obama lost 63 House seats in 2010, just as Bill Clinton lost 52 in 1994. Trump himself lost 40 in 2018. Yet Democratic losses this time will be much fewer, even at a time of great economic hardship and low poll ratings for the Democratic president. How was Biden able to buck that historical trend? The answer lies, in part, with Trump.

The former president inserted himself into multiple contests, endorsing candidates at the primaries stage when parties choose their standard-bearers. The Trump seal of approval proved decisive in several, but just look at how those Trump favourites fared. True, the memoirist and venture capitalist JD Vance won in now solidly red Ohio, but in swing states Trumpers performed badly. An election denier who had been present at the 6 January Capitol Hill riot was trounced in the race to be Pennsylvania governor, while TV doctor Mehmet Oz, another Trump pick, was defeated in the Senate race by Democrat John Fetterman – even though the latter faced persistent questions about his ability to serve following a severe stroke in the summer.

Perhaps most revealing of the Trump effect was Georgia. Two Republican officials who became nationally known when they resisted Trump pressure to overturn the 2020 presidential count in their state were comfortably re-elected. But Herschel Walker, handpicked by Trump to run for the senate in Georgia, was in a photo finish for that all-important seat, one set to be decided by a run-off next month. Meanwhile, a Trumper in New Hampshire was soundly beaten, while another, Kari Lake, seemed to be trailing in what should have been a winnable contest in Arizona.

As Wednesday morning came, a pattern seemed to be emerging. Even Fox News reporters were quoting Republican sources telling them: “If it wasn’t clear before, it should be now. We have a Trump problem.”

It wasn’t just Trump’s talent for picking duff candidates in states Republicans had to win (and will need to win again in 2024). It was the transformation he has wrought in the Republican party itself. A majority of GOP candidates had cast doubt on or outright denied the legitimacy of the 2020 election. That enabled Democrats, starting with Biden himself, to argue that, whatever grievances voters had with the party’s handling of the economy, they had to vote Democrat to save democracy.

Bad poll numbers had some wondering if that was a mistaken message, given voters’ preoccupation with rising prices, but it seems to have paid dividends. Along with reproductive rights, imperilled by the supreme court’s summer ruling ending constitutional protection for abortion, the threat to democracy galvanised blue turnout, seemingly turning a red wave into a red ripple. Blame, or credit, for that comes entirely down to Trump, who made election denial a Republican article of faith.

All this affects Trump’s prospects for 2024, not least because his most obvious rival for the Republican nomination, Florida governor Ron DeSantis, had such a good night. DeSantis was re-elected in his own state by a landslide, racking up big numbers in historically Democratic counties. At that Saturday rally in Pennsylvania, Trump had mocked the governor, calling him “Ron DeSanctimonious” (not one of his better hostile nicknames). The contrast between the two is no longer flattering to Trump, a point made robustly by one senior Republican: “The one guy [Trump] attacked before election day was DeSantis – the clear winner. Meanwhile, all his guys are shitting the bed.” In Ohio, strikingly, JD Vance did not even mention the former president in his victory speech.

Cold, hard logic suggests Republicans should step away from Trump, a man who has now presided over three consecutive defeats in 2018, 2020 and 2022 (four if you include the two Georgia senate runoffs in January 2021). But it won’t be simple. For one thing, Trump’s defenders can argue that they do better when his name is on the ballot than when it is not – and it is true that Republicans did gain congressional seats in 2016 and 2020. But in some ways that underlines the problem. Because in a year when Trump himself is not a candidate, like 2022, his absence weakens hardcore Trump devotees’ desire to turn out, while his looming presence on the scene repels the floating voters who decide elections. Put another way, the Republicans’ problem is not simply Trump the man. It is that they have become Trump’s party.

All of this is sweet balm for Democrats, who can now crack open the popcorn and enjoy the spectacle of Republicans fighting each other. But that too has implications for 2024. One clear winner from these midterms is Joe Biden, who presided over a better than expected performance for his party. That will reduce the pressure on him to make way for a fresher candidate for next time. Some Democrats anticipated that the thundercloud of defeat they expected on Tuesday would have one silver lining: Biden, who is showing his 80 years, would feel compelled to announce that he would not seek re-election. Those voices have now been stilled, at least for now.

In part, Biden can thank his 2020 antagonist for that. The flaws of the 45th president helped put the 46th in the White House – and now the predecessor may have done his successor another favour. For this election night, like the previous three in America, was all about Donald Trump.

Categories
Saved Web Pages

Midterm elections 2022 results: Republicans urge Trump to delay 2024 announcement

TELEMMGLPICT000315695222_trans_NvBQzQNjv

Republicans have urged Donald Trump to delay his announcement that he will run for president in 2024 after the Republicans failed to make a predicted “red wave” in the midterm elections. 

The former president was implored to “look at realities on the ground” amid setbacks for the GOP that have raised questions about Trump’s appeal and the future of a party that has fully embraced him.

Kayleigh McEnany, former press secretary for Trump, added that he would be wise to wait until the Georgia runoff.

“I think he needs to put it on pause,” she said.

Jason Miller, a former Trump advisor who spent the night with the former president at his Mar-a-Lago club in Florida, also suggested he delay. 

“Georgia needs to be the focus of every Republican in the country right now,” Mr Miller said. “I’m not alone when I say President Trump’s best moves are to put all his efforts to get Herschel Walker elected.”

With counting still underway, the Democrats have won a stronger-than-anticipated performance, although Control of the Senate and House is still yet to be decided and they could lose both.

Follow the latest updates.

Categories
Saved Web Pages

Here’s how Donald Trump sabotaged the Republican midterms

10.METRO-final-copy.jpg?quality=75&strip

Hey, Lyin’ Ted and Sleepy Joe: Meet Toxic Trump. You know, if the former president had any self-knowledge or even the slightest ability to be self-deprecating, he might consider giving himself this alliterative nickname.

After three straight national tallies in which either he or his party or both were hammered by the national electorate, it’s time for even his stans to accept the truth: Toxic Trump is the political equivalent of a can of Raid.

What Tuesday night’s results suggest is that Trump is perhaps the most profound vote repellant in modern American history.

The surest way to lose in these midterms was to be a politician endorsed by Trump.

This is not hyperbole.

Except for deep red states where a Republican corpse would have beaten a Democrat, voters choosing in actually competitive races — who everyone expected would behave like midterm voters usually do and lean toward the out party — took one look at Trump’s hand-picked acolytes and gagged.

Liberal fundraisers actually put money behind Trump-endorsed candidates in GOP primaries all over the place to help them prevail so that Democrats could face them in the general election. It was transparently cynical and an abuse of our political process. But it worked like gangbusters.

New York Post cover for Nov. 10, 2022.New York Post cover for Nov. 10, 2022.

Candidate backed by former President Donald Trump fared poorly in the midterm elections.Candidates backed by former President Donald Trump fared poorly in the midterm elections.REUTERS/Ricardo Arduengo/File Photo

As Kevin Robillard of the Huffington Post noted on Wednesday afternoon, when a Michigan Democrat named Hilary Scholten was finally declared the winner of her House seat against a raving lunatic named John Gibbs: “With this race call, every single Republican who won their primary with help from Democratic meddling has lost in the general election.”

Gibbs is an example of Trump’s monomania. A former official for Trump’s Department of Housing and Urban Development, Gibbs Tweeted that officials associated with Hillary Clinton participated in Satanic rituals. But no matter! Gibbs believed the 2020 election was “stolen” from Trump, the only stance that matters to the former president.

Trump backed Gibbs in the primary to unseat a sitting Republican, Peter Meijer, because Meijer had the temerity to vote in favor of impeachment after the shame of Jan. 6.
Trump got his way. Republicans lost the seat.

This pattern repeated itself over and over and over again.

In almost every place a Trumpster lost, there had been a regular Republican who could and should have been the party’s nominee — a nominee who could have taken advantage of the uniquely horrible facts and fundamentals confronting Democratic candidates in 2022.

John Gibbs, the GOP candidate for Michigan's 3rd Congressional District, lost after being endorsed by Trump for repeating lies about the 2020 election.John Gibbs, the GOP candidate for Michigan’s 3rd Congressional District, lost after being endorsed by Trump for repeating lies about the 2020 election.Joel Bissell/The Grand Rapids Press via AP

Republican Senate candidate Dr. Mehmet Oz lost his race against Pennsylvania Lt. Gov. John Fetterman.Republican Senate candidate Dr. Mehmet Oz lost his race against Pennsylvania Lt. Gov. John Fetterman.REUTERS/Hannah Beier

But then Toxic Trump came in to these races, picking the candidate who bowed lowest — or, as in Pennsylvania, went for a snake-oil doctor salesman because, it seems, his wife enjoyed watching Mehmet Oz carny-bark on afternoon TV.

And the independent voters history tells us would ordinarily have flocked to the GOP said, “Oh, man, what is that stink?”

In the past four midterms, indies chose the party that did not hold the White House by double-digit margins. In 2018, with Trump as president, the Independent vote was 12 points in the Democrats’ favor. In 2006, with George W. Bush in the Oval Office, the number was 18 points. When Obama was president in 2010 and 2014, Indies went 16 and 12 points in the Republican direction respectively.

This week, Independents went 49-48 for the Democrats. One point — in the other direction.

Independents made the difference then and they made the difference on Tuesday. They didn’t want to keep hearing about voter fraud that didn’t exist, or about how the world done wrong a multi-billionaire boo-hoo whiner who lost his reelection bid due to his own incompetence.

Voters have their own problems. This election was about them, not Toxic Trump’s pathological inability to accept his own failure — and his desperate need to elevate cringe-inducing boot-lickers while punishing politicians capable of an independent thought.

The British political figure Oliver Cromwell once said about other British politicians who had overstayed their welcome and were ruining the country, “In the name of God, go!”

Yo, Toxic Trump: Scram.

TRUMP’S BIGGEST LOSERS

DR. MEHMET OZ

David McCormick, a former undersecretary of the Treasury Department under George W. Bush, was recruited to run for the Pennsylvania seat vacated by Republican Pat Toomey. But Trump favored TV personality Oz, and attacked McCormick in the primary. Oz lost to John Fetterman, a Democrat was so addled by a stroke he could barely debate.

BLAKE MASTERS

Mitch McConnell and other Republican leaders very much wanted Arizona Gov. Doug Ducey to run against Democrat Mark Kelly for senate. But Trump blasted Ducey for not illegally overturning the 2022 election results in Arizona, and the governor decided not to run. The race hasn’t been called, but it seems that Kelly will defeat election denier Masters.

Trump backed Blake Masters to run in Arizona over Gov. Doug Ducey.Trump backed Blake Masters to run in Arizona over Gov. Doug Ducey.Photo by Justin Sullivan/Getty Images

DON BOLDUC

The Republican candidate for senator from New Hampshire got Trump’s support for saying 2020 was stolen during the primary. But when he wavered in the general, Trump attacked him, and when Bolduc lost to Democrat Maggie Hassan, Trump disowned him.

HERSCHEL WALKER

Trump was all-in on the former NFL player despite doubts from other Republicans. Walker way underperformed fellow Republican Brian Kemp (whom Trump refused to endorse or campaign for because he wouldn’t illegally overturn Georgia’s vote), who cruised to re-election as governor. Walker now faces a runoff with Sen. Raphael Warnock.

Herschel Walker is heading to a runoff election after failing to beat out incumbent Sen. Raphael Warnock.Herschel Walker is heading to a runoff election after failing to beat out incumbent Sen. Raphael Warnock.AP Photo/Brynn Anderson

DOUG MASTRIANO

The GOP thought they had a shot at the Pennsylvania governor’s seat, but Trump boosted the election-denying Mastriano, who lost to Democrat Josh Shapiro.

TUDOR DIXON

She earned Trump’s endorsement, and a primary win, by claiming 2020 was stolen. But Republican Dixon lost the governor’s race in Michigan to incumbent Gretchen Whitmer.

Categories
Saved Web Pages

Circulan nuevas variantes de covid. Esto es lo que hay que saber

04WELL-NIGHTMARE-VARIANT-facebookJumbo.j

La “variante pesadilla” no es tan mala como suena.

  • Send any friend a story

    As a subscriber, you have 10 gift articles to give each month. Anyone can read what you share.

    Give this articleGive this articleGive this article

Credit…Getty Images

Knvul Sheikh
10 de noviembre de 2022 a las 03:00 ET

A medida que va haciendo frío y más personas trasladan sus actividades a espacios interiores, el reciente descenso de los casos de COVID-19 en Estados Unidos ha empezado a estabilizarse. Las hospitalizaciones relacionadas con el coronavirus están aumentando en algunos estados, incluyendo Arizona, Indiana, Illinois, Nevada, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Dakota del Sur y Wisconsin. Y ha habido una variedad de titulares preocupantes sobre la evasión inmunitaria y la mayor transmisibilidad de la siguiente ronda de variantes de coronavirus.

Al menos media decena de versiones del virus compiten por convertirse en la próxima cepa dominante en Estados Unidos, pero todas forman parte del mismo árbol genealógico. “Todas son descendientes de ómicron”, afirmó Albert Ko, médico y epidemiólogo de la Escuela de Salud Pública de Yale. Aunque cada subvariante tiene mutaciones ligeramente diferentes, ninguna de ellas parece estar creando olas significativas todavía, como sí lo hicieron las variantes delta y ómicron cuando aparecieron por primera vez, aseguró Ko.

Esto es lo que saben los expertos hasta ahora sobre las nuevas subvariantes y lo que sus mutaciones pueden significar para las infecciones reincidentes, los síntomas, los picos de casos y las opciones de tratamiento.

¿Qué subvariantes están circulando ahora?, y ¿qué es la “variante pesadilla”?

Según los Centros para el Control y la Prevención de Enfermedades (CDC, por su sigla en inglés), la subvariante BA.5, que impulsó la oleada de COVID-19 en el verano, sigue causando algo menos de la mitad de las infecciones en todo el país. Pero otras dos subvariantes están creciendo rápidamente y se espera que superen a la BA.5 muy pronto: BQ.1 y BQ.1.1.

Hasta el 28 de octubre, BQ.1 representaba el 14 por ciento de las infecciones por COVID-19 en Estados Unidos, mientras que BQ.1.1 representaba el 13,1 por ciento. Otra variante, denominada BQ.4.6, también ha ganado algo de terreno desde agosto. Ahora representa el 9,6 por ciento de los casos.

Las BF.7, BA.5.2.6, BA.2.75 y otras variantes también se disputan la posición en Estados Unidos, mientras que otra variante llamada XBB ha sido noticia por su papel en el aumento de casos de COVID-19 en Singapur. Algunos informes han llegado a llamar a la XBB la “variante pesadilla”, a pesar de que el número de casos e ingresos hospitalarios asociados a ella ya había descendido de manera significativa para el 29 de octubre.

El recuento de casos y la localización de cada subvariante son importantes sobre todo para quienes siguen de cerca la pandemia e intentan rastrear hasta qué punto las subvariantes evaden las protecciones inmunitarias, cuánto circulan en una comunidad y qué gravedad pueden tener para los infectados.

¿Hasta qué punto deben preocuparme estas nuevas subvariantes?

La evolución de nuevas variantes de coronavirus no es nada nuevo. “Ya nos hemos enfrentado a esto antes, con la gripe, por ejemplo”, explicó Ko. “Los virus y los patógenos intentan constantemente adaptarse y escapar de la presión inmunitaria que les planteamos”.

Con las nuevas subvariantes que son más eficaces para escapar al sistema inmunitario, los adultos sanos tienen más probabilidades de infectarse incluso después de la vacunación o de una infección previa con una variante diferente. De hecho, algunos estudios en prepublicación indican que la infección o la vacunación previas podrían no producir anticuerpos que protejan de manera sólida contra las nuevas subvariantes en los experimentos de laboratorio.

Sin embargo, otras partes del sistema inmunitario pueden salir en nuestra defensa, según Otto Yang, médico especialista en enfermedades infecciosas e investigador en inmunología de la Escuela de Medicina David Geffen de la Universidad de California en Los Ángeles.

“Las mutaciones que definen estas nuevas variantes se agrupan alrededor de un área clave para las interacciones de los anticuerpos, pero la secuencia general de la espiga no se modifica lo suficiente como para afectar a las células T que reconocen cualquier parte de la secuencia, y son las que previenen la enfermedad grave”, señaló Yang. “Las personas que están al día con sus vacunas y que reciben un tratamiento temprano con Paxlovid o con remdesivir van a estar bien en su mayor parte”. (Paxlovid es un medicamento oral antiviral, y remdesivir es un antiviral inyectable).

A la mayoría de los expertos no les preocupa la posibilidad de que las nuevas subvariantes causen enfermedades leves. “Si vemos que se reducen las muertes y si se reducen las enfermedades graves y las hospitalizaciones, incluso si la gente se infecta, eso sigue siendo un gran éxito”, aclaró Michael Osterholm, epidemiólogo y director del Centro de Investigación y Política de Enfermedades Infecciosas de la Universidad de Minnesota.

La evasión inmunitaria es una preocupación mayor para las personas inmunodeprimidas o que no tienen una respuesta inmune fuerte a las vacunas. Esto incluye a las personas que se han sometido a trasplantes de células madre u órganos, a las que reciben tratamientos contra el cáncer, a las que padecen enfermedades autoinmunes y a las que necesitan medicación inmunosupresora para varios padecimientos médicos, comentó Alpana Waghmare, experta en enfermedades infecciosas del Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center.

Las personas inmunodeprimidas suelen recurrir a vacunas preventivas como Evusheld y tratamientos intravenosos de covid como bebtelovimab, que se elaboran a partir de anticuerpos monoclonales y pueden llenar los vacíos en la protección que estos pacientes pueden tener de las vacunas, comentó Waghmare. Pero los tratamientos con anticuerpos monoclonales están diseñados para actuar sobre una parte concreta del virus; si esa parte se altera en las nuevas subvariantes, esos tratamientos podrían dejar de ser eficaces.

“Esa es la preocupación de la mayoría de los médicos, que perdamos este conjunto de herramientas para luchar contra la covid”, agregó Waghmare. Como resultado, las personas inmunodeprimidas tal vez tengan que enfrentarse a una enfermedad más grave sin la opción de un tratamiento con anticuerpos monoclonales, aunque otros tratamientos antivirales sigan impidiendo que aumenten las muertes totales en ese grupo.

¿Cuáles son los síntomas de una infección por COVID-19 con una de las nuevas subvariantes?

Todavía no hay pruebas que sugieran que las personas infectadas por BQ.1, BQ.1.1 o cualquiera de las otras subvariantes experimenten ningún síntoma nuevo o inusual, o que su enfermedad sea más grave que lo que hemos visto con las variantes anteriores de ómicron, afirmó Waghmare.

Los síntomas más comunes siguen siendo una leve secreción nasal, dolor de cabeza y dolor de garganta. Estos pueden preceder a una prueba de covid con resultado positivo, y los síntomas pueden ser leves o un poco más graves durante la duración de la enfermedad. “Es difícil saber si la reducción de la gravedad que estamos observando se debe a la variante real o a que la gente está más protegida porque se ha vacunado o ha sufrido una infección anteriormente”, añadió Waghmare.

¿Cómo puedo protegerme contra el virus?

Lo mejor que puede hacer la mayoría de la gente para protegerse en invierno es vacunarse y luego tomar la dosis de refuerzo. En particular, las personas de alto riesgo, así como las que no han recibido un refuerzo o una infección por covid en los últimos cuatro a seis meses, deberían hacer planes de vacunarse, aseguró Yang. Algunos expertos recomiendan recibir el refuerzo incluso antes.

Un estudio de Pfizer sugiere que el refuerzo actualizado bivalente, que en Estados Unidos está disponible desde septiembre, produce una mejor respuesta de anticuerpos contra la BA.5 para las personas mayores de 55 años que el refuerzo disponible anteriormente. Otros datos independientes indican que la inyección podría no ofrecer muchos beneficios adicionales a personas relativamente jóvenes y sanas que ya han recibido cuatro dosis de la vacuna. El refuerzo bivalente puede entrenar al sistema inmunitario para que reconozca el virus original de 2020, así como la variante ómicron BA.5. Pero aún está por ver la eficacia de los anticuerpos de la vacuna bivalente contra las subvariantes más recientes, como BQ.1 y BQ.1.1, que ya se han diferenciado de la BA.5.

Aparte de los anticuerpos, la protección de las células T que surge del refuerzo debería poder protegernos contra la enfermedad grave si nos infectamos, dijo Yang. Según algunos estudios realizados en Israel, la protección de las células T parece empezar a disminuir en torno a los seis meses, por lo que podrías considerar la posibilidad de recibir otra vacuna si ha pasado más tiempo, incluso si eres joven y estás saludable.

Las personas con alto riesgo de padecer COVID-19 grave o con familiares vulnerables también deben considerar la posibilidad de usar cubrebocas, evitar los lugares cerrados con mucha gente y preguntar a los demás sobre los síntomas de covid o las exposiciones si asisten a reuniones durante la temporada de festividades. También deben hacerse pruebas con frecuencia y recibir medicación antiviral, como Paxlovid, desde el principio si una prueba da resultado positivo, explicó Waghmare.

WP Radio
WP Radio
OFFLINE LIVE