Antibodies generated as a response to vaccination that target the SARS-CoV2 binding domain, which is what makes the initial bond with an ACE2 receptor to enter a cell and begin infection, are less effective against some variants that have a modified binding domain. Rather than addressing relative risks, this paper is more about understanding the mechanisms involved which appear to be a combination of modifications to the structure of the binding domain and rearrangement of its disulfide bonds.
"Variant of concern" is just a CDC classification which applies to all variants which are interesting enough to require close monitoring, for whatever reason. It is below "variant of high consequence" in the ladder of how worried you should be.
Even Delta is not a "variant of high consequence". There will be extreme reluctance to make that declaration because it would signal that lockdowns and other non-pharmaceutical interventions will be needed for a much longer period than we previously thought.
The WHO is way too political. They could have stopped it right at the start by (advising to) quarantining China from the rest of the world but they decided to play along with China that played down the seriousness (remember that doctor that was being punished by China for revealing the truth). We're still cleaning up their mess. Then with India and the Delta variant the same things happened.
The WHO should be about science not politics. If it's that dangerous they should declare it as such so appropriate measures can be taken. All these things were known in advance but measures not taken because of political or economic concerns.
> They could have stopped it right at the start by quarantining China from the rest of the world
No, they couldn't.
For one thing, WHO doesn't regulate international travel and couldn't quarantine anyone if they wanted to.
(Now, various governments—including the US government which had intelligence on it before China announced anything publicly—could have stopped travel from China, but that's...not the WHO.)
No they don't regulate international travel but they could have publicly come out and said this would have been necessary. Any government sidestepping them would have taken a huge political risk if they had been wrong (and they would have been!). It's a big thing for a government to overrule the WHO.
I'm sure that they would have done it if they had been about science and not about politics. All the knowledge of how serious this was, was there at the start.
I think the discussion of how it came to spread worldwide is even more important than how it emerged in the first place. In particular because we keep making the same mistakes with these variants. The failure to contain the British (Alpha) variant should have been enough warning to up that game. If Delta hadn't spread to Europe and US we would have been in a great situation with current vaccination levels because Alpha was not that dangerous after all.
I'm just worried we will make the wrong choices again for the next one which may be even more destructive. For Delta we're too late. For whatever is next we may not be.
I think you overestimate how well the WHO is run. It has to be political because it is a multinational political entity whether they call themselves that or not.
They don't have willy nilly use of their funding either, and they sometimes have to deal with very difficult heads of state. It's to be expected for an organisation that big, with that size scope to be in a state of semi-chaos no different than a huge multinational.