Skip to main content

Animal infection with COVID-19 virus

The virus vector for COVID-19 pandemic is a novel zoonotic coronavirus,  SARS-CoV-2,  most likely originating from bats.  One problem in combating the virus is that we know so little about it.  We don't know, for example, whether any immunity developed in humans will last, or how long it will last.  Nor do we know to what extent it jumps from species to species.  Is it possible that our livestock, or our domestic pets,  will become infected?
 
Whether SARS-CoV-2 can also infect other animal species is being investigated by various research institutes worldwide. The Friedrich-Loeffler-Institut (FLI) started infection studies in pigs, chickens, fruit bats, and ferrets several weeks ago. 



First results show that fruit bats and ferrets are susceptible to SARS-CoV-2 infection, whereas pigs and chickens are not. The susceptibility of ferrets in particular is an important finding, as they could be used as model animals for human infection to test vaccines or drugs.

In the infection studies, the animals were inoculated nasally with SARS-CoV-2 to mimic the natural route of infection in humans via the nasopharyngeal route. Egyptian fruit bats, a megabat species, were tested to gain knowledge about the suspected reservoir function of bats. 

These bats became infected, but did not show any symptoms of disease and did not infect their fellow animals efficiently.


Ferrets are a good model for humans for other respiratory infections, especially those caused by influenza viruses. Since SARS-CoV-2 mainly replicates in the respiratory tract, ferrets could also be a suitable model for this infection. Such an animal model reflecting human infection is currently sought urgently worldwide.

Ferrets could be a helpful model for testing drugs


FLI experiments show that ferrets can be efficiently infected with SARS-CoV-2, the virus replicates well and can be transmitted to fellow animals. The virus mainly replicates in the respiratory tract, but the animals showed no symptoms of disease. This provides an infection model that could be helpful in the testing of vaccines and drugs against SARS-CoV-2.


Farm animals in particular are in close contact with humans. Therefore, pigs and chickens have been tested for susceptibility to SARS-CoV-2.

Pigs and chickens were free of infection


Under experimental conditions, neither pigs nor chickens were found to be susceptible to infection with SARS-CoV-2. According to the current state of knowledge, they are not affected by the virus and therefore do not pose a potential risk to human health. The complete evaluation of all test series will take some time, final results are expected at the beginning of May.

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Ian Duncan-Smith says he wants to make those on benefits 'better people'!

By any account, the government's austerity strategy is utilitarian. It justifies its approach by the presumed potential ends. It's objective is to cut the deficit, but it has also adopted another objective which is specifically targeted. It seeks to drive people off benefits and 'back to work'.  The two together are toxic to the poorest in society. Those least able to cope are the most affected by the cuts in benefits and the loss of services. It is the coupling of these two strategic aims that make their policies ethically questionable. For, by combining the two, slashing the value of benefits to make budget savings while also changing the benefits system, the highest burden falls on a specific group, those dependent on benefits. For the greater good of the majority, a minority group, those on benefits, are being sacrificed; sacrificed on the altar of austerity. And they are being sacrificed in part so that others may be spared. Utilitarian ethics considers the ba...
7 comments
Read more

Ethical considerations of a National DNA database.

Plans for a national DNA database   will be revealed by the Prime Minister this week. This is the same proposal the Tories and Liberal Democrats opposed when presented by the Blair government because they argued it posed  a threat to civil liberties. This time it is expected to offer an 'opt-out' clause for those who do not wish their data to be stored; exactly how this would operate isn't yet clear. But does it matter and does it really pose a threat to civil liberties? When it comes to biology and ethics we tend to have a distorted view of DNA and genetics. This is for two reasons. The first is that it is thought that our genome somehow represents the individual as a code that then gets translated. This is biologically speaking wrong. DNA is a template and part of the machinery for making proteins. It isn't a code in anything like the sense of being a 'blueprint' or 'book of life'.  Although these metaphors are used often they are just that, metapho...
2 comments
Read more

The unethical language of 'welfare dependency'

It is unethical to stigmatise people without foundation. Creating a stereotype, a generalised brand, in order to  demonize a group regardless of the individual and without regard for the potential harm it may do is unfair and prejudicial. It is one reason, and a major one, why racism is unethical; it fails to give a fair consideration of interest to a group of people simply because they are branded in this way. They are not worthy of equal consideration because they are different.  It seeks also to influence the attitudes of others to those stereotyped. If I said 'the Irish are lazy'; you would rightly respond that this is a ridiculous and unfounded stereotype. It brands all Irish on the basis of a prejudice. It is harmful certainly; but it is worse if I intend it to be harmful. If I intend to influence the attitude of others. And so it is with 'the unemployed'. All I need do is substitute 'work-shy' and use it in an injudicious way; to imply that it applies to...
2 comments
Read more