Click to Translate to English Click to Translate to French  Click to Translate to Spanish  Click to Translate to German  Click to Translate to Italian  Click to Translate to Japanese  Click to Translate to Chinese Simplified  Click to Translate to Korean  Click to Translate to Arabic  Click to Translate to Russian  Click to Translate to Portuguese  Click to Translate to Myanmar (Burmese)

PANDEMIC ALERT LEVEL
123456
Forum Home Forum Home > Main Forums > General Discussion
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Yet Another Article on Where the Virus Came From
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Tracking the next pandemic: Avian Flu Talk

Yet Another Article on Where the Virus Came From

 Post Reply Post Reply
Author
Message
Technophobe View Drop Down
Assistant Admin
Assistant Admin
Avatar

Joined: January 16 2014
Location: Scotland
Status: Offline
Points: 88450
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Technophobe Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Yet Another Article on Where the Virus Came From
    Posted: January 27 2020 at 6:21am

Wuhan seafood market may not be source of novel virus spreading globally

By Jon CohenJan. 26, 2020 , 11:25 PM

As confirmed cases of a novel virus surge around the world with worrisome speed, all eyes have so far focused on a seafood market in Wuhan, China, as the origin of the outbreak. But a description of the first clinical cases published in The Lancet on Friday challenges that hypothesis.

The paper, written by a large group of Chinese researchers from several institutions, offers details about the first 41 hospitalized patients who had confirmed infections with what has been dubbed 2019-novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV). The earliest case became ill on 1 December and had no reported link to the seafood market, the authors report. “No epidemiological link was found between the first patient and later cases,” they state. Their data also show that in total, 13 of the 41 cases had no link to the marketplace either. “That’s a big number, 13, with no link,” says Daniel Lucey, an infectious disease specialist at the University of Georgetown

Earlier reports from Chinese health authorities and the World Health Organization said the first patient had onset of symptoms on 8 December—and those reports simply said “most” cases had links to the seafood market, which was closed on 1 January.

Lucey says if the new data are accurate, the first human infections must have occurred in November—if not earlier—because there is an incubation time between infection and symptoms surfacing. If so, the virus possibly spread silently between people in Wuhan and perhaps elsewhere before the cluster of cases from the city’s now infamous Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market was discovered in late December. “The virus came into that marketplace before it came out of that marketplace,” Lucey asserts.
Sign up for our daily newsletter

The Lancet paper’s data also raises questions about the accuracy of the initial information China provided, says Lucey. At the beginning of the outbreak, the main official source of public information was notices from the Wuhan Municipal Health Commission. Its notices on 11 January started to refer to the 41 patients as the only confirmed cases and the count remained the same until 18 January. The notices did not state that the seafood market was the source, but repeatedly noted that there was no evidence of human-to-human transmission and that most cases linked to the market. Because the Wuhan Municipal Health Commission noted that diagnostic tests had confirmed these 41 cases by January 10 and officials presumably knew the case histories of each patient, “China must have realized the epidemic did not originate in that Wuhan Huanan seafood market,” Lucey tells ScienceInsider. (Lucey also spoke about his concerns in an interview published online yesterday by Science Speaks, a project of the Infectious Disease Society of America.)

Kristian Anderson, an evolutionary biologist at the Scripps Research Institute in San Diego who has analyzed sequences of 2019-nCoV to try to clarify its origin, says the 1 December timing of the first confirmed case was “an interesting tidbit” in The Lancet paper. “The scenario of somebody being infected outside the market and then later bringing it to the market is one of the three scenarios we have considered that is still consistent with the data, he says. “It’s entirely plausible given our current data and knowledge.” The other two scenarios are that the origin was a group of infected animals or a single animal that came into that marketplace.

Anderson on 25 January posted on a virology research website his analysis of 27 available genomes of 2019-nCoV. It suggests they had a “most recent common ancestor”—meaning a common source—as early as 1 October.

Bin Cao of Capital Medical University in Beijing, the corresponding author of the Lancet article and a pulmonary specialist, wrote Science in an e-mail that he and his co-authors “appreciate the criticism” from Lucey.. “Now It seems clear that [the] seafood market is not the only origin of the virus,” he wrote in an e-mail to ScienceInsider. “But to be honest, we still do not know where the virus came from now.”

Lucey notes that the discovery of the coronavirus that causes Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS), a sometimes fatal disease that occurs sporadically, came from a patient in Saudi Arabia in June 2012 but later studies traced it back to an earlier hospital outbreak of unexplained pneumonia in Jordan in April of that year. Stored samples from two people who died in Jordan confirmed that they had been infected with the virus. Retrospective analyses of blood samples in China from people and animals—including vendors from other animal markets--may reveal a clear picture of where the 2019-nCoV originated, he suggests. “There might be a clear signal among the noise,” he says.


Source:   [url]https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/01/wuhan-seafood-market-may-not-be-source-novel-virus-spreading-globally[url]
How do you tell if a politician is lying?
His lips or pen are moving.
Back to Top
carbon20 View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: April 08 2006
Location: West Australia
Status: Offline
Points: 65816
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote carbon20 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 27 2020 at 2:21pm
New Scientist uses cookies to provide you with a great user experience. By using this website, you agree to the use of cookies on your device.
Accept
×
New Scientist
SUBSCRIBE AND SAVE 60%

Menu
Wuhan coronavirus may have been transmitted to people from snakes
HEALTH 22 January 2020
By Jessica Hamzelou

New Scientist Default Image
Health officials in Singapore scan travellers in an effort to contain the spread of a new virus
Roslan Rahman/AFP via Getty Images

A new coronavirus originating in Wuhan, China, that has claimed 17 lives may have been transmitted to people from snakes, according to a genetic analysis. The snakes may have caught the virus from bats in the food market in which both animals were sold.

As of 22 January, there are 555 confirmed cases of the infection, which can cause fever, difficulty breathing and pneumonia. To contain the virus, Wuhan has effectively been placed under quarantine, with public transport being temporarily closed, according to reports.

While 444 of the cases have been reported in Wuhan, others have also been confirmed in the surrounding regions of China, with 26 in Guangdong province, 14 in Beijing and 9 in Shanghai. Internationally, confirmed cases have been reported in Thailand, Japan, South Korea and the US. Hundreds more are suspected, and attempts to diagnose these cases are under way.


The source of the infection is suspected to be a food market in Wuhan that was visited by several of those first infected with the virus. The market is known to sell live wild and farmed animals, including marmots, birds, rabbits, bats and snakes.

Read more: Bats spread Ebola because they’ve evolved not to fight viruses
To find out if the virus might have come from one of these animals, Wei Ji and colleagues at Peking University in China compared the genomes of five samples of the new virus with 217 similar viruses collected from a range of species.

Their analysis suggests that the new virus looks similar to those found in bats, but is most like viruses seen in snakes, genetically speaking. “Results derived from our sequence analysis suggest for the first time that snake is the most likely wildlife animal reservoir,” they wrote.

“We are excited about this new speculation,” says Haitao Guo at the University of Pittsburgh in Pennsylvania, who reviewed the study. “We need more experimental evidence, but it gives us a clue,” he says.

The new virus may have formed as a result of viruses from bats and snakes combining, which can happen when two types of animal are kept in close quarters, as can happen in food markets, says Peter Rabinowitz at the University of Washington in Seattle.

Read more: Mysterious illness outbreak in China seems to be caused by a new virus
The virus may then have passed to people through the air, says Rabinowitz. “It’s still speculation, but if the virus is in the secretions or faeces of the snakes, it would be possible to aerosolise and be breathed in if there were enough snakes and enough people,” he says.

On 22 January, the World Health Organization held an emergency committee on the new virus, which is in the same family as SARS and MERS. Following the meeting, director general Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said that he needed more information on the virus and its spread before he could declare the outbreak a public health emergency.

“This is an evolving and complex situation,” said Ghebreyesus. “The decision about whether or not to declare a public health emergency of international concern is one I take extremely seriously, and one I am only prepared to make with appropriate consideration of all the evidence.”

The emergency committee will meet again tomorrow, and Ghebreyesus promises they “will have much more to say” then.

Journal reference: Journal of Medical Virology, DOI: 10.1002/jmv.25682

Article amended on 23 January 2020
We amended an incorrect use of the term species.

More on these topics:

virusesinfectious disease
TRENDING
LATEST
VIDEO
FREE
What are the symptoms of the new coronavirus and how deadly is
Get it on Google Play
FOLLOW US
© Copyright New Scientist Ltd.
Back to top



Read more: https://www.newscientist.com/article/2231162-wuhan-coronavirus-may-have-been-transmitted-to-people-from-snakes/#ixzz6CGualhiO
Everything we hear is an opinion, not a fact. Everything we see is a perspective, not the truth.🖖

Marcus Aurelius
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down