&w=3840&q=100)
Stratus Update: How XFG is likely to become the next dominant Covid variant
The most recent addition before XFG was NB.1.8.1 which the Who declared a variant under monitoring. Representational image/Pixabay
Given the number of times this has happened already, it should come as little surprise that we're now faced with yet another new subvariant of SARS-CoV-2, the virus responsible for Covid.
This new subvariant is known as XFG (nicknamed ' Stratus') and the World Health Organization (Who) designated it a 'variant under monitoring' in late June. XFG is a subvariant of Omicron, of which there are now more than 1,000.
A 'variant under monitoring' signifies a variant or subvariant which needs prioritised attention and monitoring due to characteristics that may pose an additional threat compared to other circulating variants.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
XFG was one of seven variants under monitoring as of June 25. The most recent addition before XFG was NB.1.8.1 (nicknamed 'Nimbus'), which the Who declared a variant under monitoring on May 23.
Both nimbus and stratus are types of clouds.
Nimbus is currently the dominant subvariant worldwide – but Stratus is edging closer. So, what do you need to know about Stratus or XFG?
A recombinant variant
XFG is a recombinant of LF.7 and LP.8.1.2, which means these two subvariants have shared genetic material to come up with the new subvariant. Recombinants are designated with an X at the start of their name.
While recombination and other spontaneous changes happen often with SARS-CoV-2, it becomes a problem when it creates a subvariant that is changed in such a way that its properties cause more problems for us.
Most commonly, this means the virus looks different enough that protection from past infection (and vaccination) doesn't work so well, called immune evasion. This basically means the population becomes more susceptible and can lead to an increase in cases, and even a whole new wave of Covid infections across the world.
XFG has four key mutations in the spike protein, a protein on the surface of SARS-CoV-2, which allows it to attach to our cells. Some are believed to enhance evasion by certain antibodies.
Early laboratory studies have suggested a nearly two-fold reduction in how well antibodies block the virus compared to LP.8.1.1.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
Where is XFG spreading?
The earliest XFG sample was collected on January 27.
As of June 22, there were 1,648 XFG sequences submitted to GISAID from 38 countries ( GISAID is the global database used to track the prevalence of different variants around the world). This represents 22.7 per cent of the globally available sequences at the time.
The advice for combating Covid remains unchanged, including vaccination as recommended and the early administration of antivirals for those who are eligible. Representational image/Pixabay
This was a significant rise from 7.4 per cent four weeks prior and only just below the proportion of NB.1.8.1 at 24.9 per cent. Given the now declining proportion of viral sequences of NB.1.8.1 overall, and the rapid rise of XFG, it would seem reasonable to expect XFG to become dominant very soon.
According to Australian data expert Mike Honey, the countries showing the highest rates of detection of XFG as of mid-June include India at more than 50 per cent, followed by Spain at 42 per cent, and the United Kingdom and United States, where the subvariant makes up more than 30 per cent of cases.
In Australia, as of June 29, NB.1.8.1 was the dominant subvariant, accounting for 48.6 per cent of sequences. In the most recent report from Australia's national genomic surveillance platform, there were 24 XFG sequences, with 12 collected in the last 28 days, meaning it currently comprises approximately 5 per cent of sequences.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
The big questions
When we talk about a new subvariant, people often ask questions, including if it's more severe or causes new or different symptoms compared to previous variants. But we're still learning about XFG and we can't answer these questions with certainty yet.
Some sources have reported XFG may be more likely to cause 'hoarseness' or a scratchy or raspy voice. But we need more information to know if this association is truly significant.
Notably, there's no evidence to suggest XFG causes more severe illness compared to other variants in circulation or that it is necessarily any more transmissible.
Will vaccines still work against XFG?
Relatively frequent changes to the virus mean we have continued to update the Covid vaccines. The most recent update, which targets the JN.1 subvariant, became available in Australia from late 2024. XFG is a descendant of the JN.1 subvariant.
Fortunately, based on the evidence available so far, currently approved Covid vaccines are expected to remain effective against XFG, particularly against symptomatic and severe disease.
Because of SARS-CoV-2's continued evolution, the effect of this on our immune response, as well as the fact that protection from Covid vaccines declines over time, Covid vaccines are offered regularly and recommended for those at the highest risk.
One of the major challenges we face at present in Australia is low Covid vaccine uptake. While rates have increased somewhat recently, they remain relatively low, with aged 75 years and over having received a vaccine in the past six months. Vaccination rates in younger age groups are significantly lower.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
Although the situation with XFG must continue to be monitored, at present the Who has assessed the global risk posed by this subvariant as low. The advice for combating Covid remains unchanged, including vaccination as recommended and the early administration of antivirals for those who are eligible.
Measures to reduce the risk of transmission, particularly wearing masks in crowded indoor settings and focusing on air quality and ventilation, are worth remembering to protect against Covid and other viral infections.
Paul Griffin, Professor, Infectious Diseases and Microbiology, The University of Queensland
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
4 hours ago
- Time of India
Hepatitis: Adults Can Also Get Vaccinated If They Missed The Jab In Childhood
Nagpur: As the world observes World Hepatitis Day on July 28, liver disease specialists in Nagpur are urging citizens to act before it's too late — highlighting that Hepatitis B vaccination is not just for children. Adults who missed their shots earlier in life can — and should — get vaccinated now, say doctors. Dr Piyush Marudwar, consultant gastroenterologist and liver transplant physician, said that even today, millions of adults remain unaware that the Hepatitis B vaccine is safe, effective, and easily available at any age. "Hepatitis may be silent, but our response must be loud. Awareness, timely screening, and vaccination are our strongest tools in defeating this global health challenge," said Dr Marudwar. Adding a local perspective, Dr Amol Samarth, gastroenterologist and hepatologist at Super Specialty Hospital, Nagpur, said that hepatitis remains an underdiagnosed but serious threat in Vidarbha, especially because of late testing. "In Nagpur, we are seeing a growing number of patients diagnosed with Hepatitis B and C during evaluations for other illnesses. Unfortunately, many reach us when liver damage has already progressed. Routine screening and adult vaccination are the most effective ways to prevent this," said Dr Samarth. He added that public hospitals like Super Specialty Hospital offer affordable screening and consultation facilities, and that both Hepatitis B vaccination and antiviral treatment are widely accessible in Nagpur now. This year's theme, 'Hepatitis Can't Wait', underscores the urgency of acting early. Doctors warn that the post-Covid disruption in routine health check-ups has led to delays in hepatitis detection and follow-up care. "Hepatitis is one of the leading causes of end-stage liver disease and the need for liver transplantation in India," said Dr Rahul Saxena, secretary of ZTCC Nagpur and a prominent liver transplant surgeon. "Nagpur is gradually becoming a liver transplant-ready city with better awareness and infrastructure. But to reduce the burden, we must focus on prevention," he said. "Hepatitis B has a safe and effective vaccine, and Hepatitis C is now curable with oral medications. Still, many patients present late due to lack of awareness or stigma," Dr Saxena added. All specialists emphasised that testing for hepatitis should be as common as checking for diabetes or blood pressure, especially for high-risk groups such as healthcare workers, pregnant women, dialysis patients, and those who've had blood transfusions.
The Hindu
4 hours ago
- The Hindu
Liver diseases often go undetected; doctors call for early screening and awareness
An estimated 304 million people worldwide live with chronic hepatitis B or C, according to the World Health Organization (WHO). Of these, 254 million have hepatitis B and 50 million have hepatitis C. The disease causes about 1.3 million deaths annually over 3,500 each day. India accounts for over 11.6% of the global burden, with around 29.8 million people living with hepatitis B and 5.5 million with hepatitis C. Hepatitis is inflammation of the liver, most commonly caused by viral infections, mainly hepatitis A, B, C, D, and E. Among these, hepatitis B and C can become chronic, potentially leading to cirrhosis, liver failure or cancer. Transmission can occur through unsafe injections, blood transfusions, sexual contact or from mother to child during childbirth. Despite the scale, most infections remain undiagnosed until complications arise. Doctors say this is due to vague early symptoms, inadequate screening, and widespread misconceptions. 'In the early stages, liver trouble may show up as fatigue, appetite loss or mild abdominal pain - symptoms that are easily overlooked,' said Vivekanandan Shanmugam, Lead Liver Transplant Surgeon, SIMS Hospital, Chennai . 'Even signs like dark urine or yellowing of the eyes are ignored. As a result, patients often present late.' He added that screening for hepatitis B and C is recommended for high-risk groups - those who had blood transfusions before the 1990s, dialysis patients and healthcare workers, but implementation remains patchy. 'Many people don't know they should get tested. There is stigma and poor access, especially in peripheral areas,' he said. Dr. Shanmugam also flagged the impact of over-the-counter painkillers and unregulated herbal supplements. 'The liver filters everything we consume. Long-term misuse of common drugs like paracetamol or herbal concoctions can silently damage the liver.' Radhika Venugopal, Senior Consultant - Hepatology, Liver Disease & Transplantation, Rela Hospital, Chennai, said symptoms such as nausea, fatigue, or weight loss are often ignored. 'By the time jaundice, swelling or bleeding appears, damage is usually advanced. Liver function tests and scans can help detect problems early,' she said. She noted that hepatitis testing is not well integrated into routine healthcare, particularly in rural settings. 'Pregnant women, people with HIV, and those undergoing surgery or dialysis must be screened, but enforcement is weak.' Dr. Venugopal also flagged the rise in 'lean MAFLD' (metabolic-associated fatty liver disease) in people with normal weight but underlying metabolic issues. 'Tools like FibroScan help detect this early.' Doctors recommend hepatitis B vaccination, avoiding excessive alcohol, limiting self-medication, and routine check-ups. 'The liver is silent until it's too late,' said Dr. Shanmugam.
The Wire
5 hours ago
- The Wire
Recovery, the Unfinished Business of the Pandemic
The consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic far outlasted the health emergency. Long after infection curves flattened and emergency declarations were lifted, countries across the globe continued to wrestle with a deep economic, social and health-related fallout. In India, over 23 crore people were pushed into poverty during the pandemic years, with rural and informal sector workers bearing the brunt, and the economic spillover continues to be seen in the form of increased government debt, rising inflation, a stagnating hospitality industry and other things, even after half a decade has passed since the onset of COVID. In the health sector, the disruption to routine immunisation services led to measles outbreaks in numerous Sub-Saharan countries, while a UNICEF report warned that about 23 million children missed out on essential vaccines in 2020 alone. Mental health outcomes also deteriorated sharply. Data from the WHO shows that there was a 25% global increase in anxiety and depression in the first year of the pandemic. These aftershocks demonstrate that recovery is not a passive return to normalcy – it is a protracted and complex phase that demands sustained attention, governance and resource mobilisation. The COVID-19 pandemic has triggered worldwide efforts to mitigate the scale and impact of future health emergencies, including amendments to the International Health Regulations (IHR); the creation of the Pandemic Fund and the WHO Pandemic Intelligence Hub; and the ACT-Accelerator, COVAX and One Health initiatives. The latest – and most talked-about – in this series of efforts is the WHO Pandemic Agreement, which was adopted on May 20, 2025 after three years of negotiations and discussions. It will become a legally binding international instrument on pandemic prevention, preparedness and response once it is signed by 60 countries. After India's vote in favour of the resolution to adopt the agreement, making it an official state party to the agreement, the prime minister has talked about its importance for vulnerable populations in the Global South that disproportionately bear the effects of health challenges. In order to successfully achieve this goal, the agreement needs to accomplish two things – chart out obligations targeted towards vulnerable populations, and highlight the specific ways in which pandemics' disproportionate impact on the Global South can be mitigated. While the agreement does lay the ground for equity in both aspects, it falls short of outlining implementable measures to achieve these goals meaningfully without hindering sovereign decisions. Notably, the Pathogen Access and Benefit-Sharing (PABS) annex, a critical component tied to equity and access, still has another year to be worked out, further delaying clarity on how benefit-sharing commitments will be operationalised. Commendably, the agreement talks about the need to provide affordable health and other social support services to 'persons in vulnerable situations'. It also calls for the mitigation of the socioeconomic impacts of pandemics on such persons. However, it misses an opportunity to guide state parties on when and how this should be done at the domestic and trans-national levels, especially at the time of recovery. Integrating recovery into the pandemic agreement Article 3 of the agreement, titled 'Preparedness, health system resilience and recovery', gestures toward the importance of post-pandemic strategies. However, recovery is buried within broader health system resilience goals and mentioned only in passing. It refers vaguely to 'developing post-pandemic health system recovery strategies' without outlining how, when or by whom such strategies must be developed, implemented or monitored. This diluted treatment effectively renders recovery a discretionary task, rather than an obligation. There is no requirement for countries to assess the long-term impacts of pandemics on vulnerable populations, nor is there any architecture for coordinating recovery efforts, allocating responsibilities or ensuring accountability. In the light of this gap, recovery must be established as a clear, foundational pillar within the pandemic agreement – not a vague aspiration buried under resilience. It is important to acknowledge at the onset that international treaties cannot impose rigid mandates on sovereign states. However, by creating shared expectations and enabling frameworks, they can support states in fulfilling recovery goals without infringing on national autonomy. Rather than prescribe uniform recovery models, the agreement can promote adaptable, equity-based cooperation that complements domestic efforts while ensuring accountability and consistency across borders. The agreement should require states to develop standalone national recovery frameworks tailored to their contexts, with explicit mandates for implementation, periodic review and transparent reporting. Recovery should be understood broadly – not just as restoring health systems but as encompassing social, economic and mental health dimensions affected by pandemics. A comprehensive recovery approach must prioritise impact assessments focused on marginalised and vulnerable populations – including gender minorities, workers in the informal sector, migrants, senior citizens, homeless populations, persons with disabilities and ethnic minorities – who disproportionately suffer during crises. These assessments should directly inform targeted economic and social policies, such as livelihood restoration, social protection adjustments and reintegration support, to prevent widening inequalities in the post-crisis phase. Further, recovery goals must be multi-dimensional and should account for the wide-ranging impact of pandemics across different key areas. Accordingly, the agreement should embed principles for access to justice and redressal mechanisms for harms suffered during pandemics, the restoration of disrupted education systems, safeguards for the continuity of essential public and welfare services, mechanisms for the review of governmental decisions and actions during the state of exception, and the rebuilding of public trust through transparent and participatory governance. The absence of these dimensions risks a recovery that is piecemeal and opaque, weakening institutional integrity and leaving societies more vulnerable to future crises. International cooperation in recovery efforts In order to achieve the aim of equity, especially across the Global North-Global South divide, the international community must direct its attention to recovery efforts across national borders. The agreement must institutionalise mechanisms for international coordination and solidarity during the recovery phase, facilitating sharing of expertise, resources and data across countries to reduce regional vulnerabilities and promote equitable resilience. The bodies set up under the agreement do not account for this adequately, in terms of function or finances. The mechanisms set up under the agreement, such as PABS, deal with important functions like pathogen and data sharing, and pharmaceutical supply and distribution. There are no such systems established for recovery. The Coordinating Financial Mechanism previously established under the IHR has been envisaged as the mechanism to promote sustainable financing for the implementation of the pandemic agreement as well. Its mandate under the pandemic agreement is to 'support strengthening and expanding capacities for pandemic prevention, preparedness and response, and contribute to the prompt availability of surge financing response necessary as of day zero, particularly in developing country Parties.' This conspicuously and concerningly misses recovery as a crucial stage of assessing impacts and developing strategies for rebuilding, which is especially crucial for low and middle-income countries in the Global South, including India. The cultural impact of international documents Understandably, international agreements cannot impose specific obligations in the same way that domestic laws can. Given the legally binding nature of the pandemic agreement, it should also refrain from interfering with sovereign and context-specific decisions adopted at the national and sub-national levels. At the same time, beyond policy prescriptions, international treaties play a critical role in shaping legal cultures and empowering civil society to demand justice and reform. By embedding preparedness, resilience-building and recovery within the pandemic agreement, the global community will be able to create a shared vocabulary and normative framework that activists, policymakers and courts can invoke domestically to advance equity and resilience. India's past experience has illustrated this dynamic vividly. The Vishakha Guidelines on workplace sexual harassment, which transformed protections for women, were grounded in India's commitments under the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women. Similarly, the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities has influenced landmark judicial decisions and legislative reforms enhancing disability rights and access to welfare in India. What can be done to prioritise recovery? While laying out the rules or procedure and terms of reference, the Intergovernmental Working Group empowered under the agreement must lay down specific provisions on recovery, including indicative domestic guidance, mechanisms for international cooperation and sustainable financing or recovery that recognises marginalisation and prioritises equity. Embedding principles that prioritise domestic and international efforts will shift recovery from a discretionary afterthought to a binding commitment that demands accountability without prescribing inflexible solutions. It provides states with a flexible but clear mandate to build inclusive, adaptive recovery architectures that address the deep, lasting fallout of pandemics. Shreyashi Ray is a senior resident fellow with the health team at the Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy. Anchal Bhatheja is a research fellow at the centre.
