Header Ads Widget

Ticker

6/recent/ticker-posts

Studies connect COVID-19 to animal sales in the Chinese market and consider other possibilities to be very improbable.

 The pandemic began at Huanan market in Wuhan, China, according to analyses based on locations and viral sequencing of early COVID-19 cases, with live animals being sold at the market as the most probable source. The SARS-Cov-2 virus entered humans on two consecutive times, according to genomic analyses.

The COVID-19 epidemic, which has claimed 6.4 million lives since it started almost three years ago, was most likely caused by live animals sold at the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market, according to a global team of academics.

International teams of researchers, under the direction of University of Arizona virus evolution expert Michael Worobey, have pinpointed the origin of the pandemic to a market in Wuhan, China, where foxes, raccoon dogs, and other live mammals susceptible to the virus were sold live just before the pandemic started. After first being made public in pre-print forms in February, their results were later published in two publications in the journal Science.

The articles essentially rule out other hypotheses that have been put up as possible causes of the pandemic. They have subsequently undergone peer review and incorporate additional analysis and findings. The authors also come to the conclusion that two distinct transmission occurrences at the Huanan market in late November 2019 are most likely what caused the initial animal-to-human transfer.

One investigation examined the sites of the first confirmed COVID-19 infections as well as swab samples collected from surfaces at different market locations. The second focused on SARS-CoV-2 genomic sequences from samples taken from COVID-19 patients in China during the early stages of the epidemic.

The first study looked at the geographic distribution of COVID-19 patients in the first month of the epidemic, December 2019, and was headed by Worobey and Kristian Andersen from Scripps Research Institute in San Diego, California. Nearly all of the 174 COVID-19 cases reported by the World Health Organization in that month—155 of which were in Wuhan—were located by the researchers.

In contrast to subsequent instances, which were widely spread around Wuhan, a metropolis of 11 million people, analysis revealed that these patients were concentrated closely around the Huanan market. Notably, the researchers discovered that a startling proportion of early COVID patients who had no known relationship to the market—meaning they did not work there nor do their shopping there—actually resided close to the market. This reinforces the theory put out by Worobey that the market served as the epidemic's focal point, with sellers being sick first and starting a chain reaction of illnesses among local residents.

According to Worobey, the head of the UA Arizona Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, "in a city covering more than 3,000 square miles, the area with the highest probability of containing the home of someone who had one of the earliest COVID-19 cases in the world was an area of a few city blocks, with the Huanan market smack dab inside it."

A second discovery helped to confirm this conclusion: According to Worobey, the authors discovered a "polar opposite" trend when they examined the geographic distribution of subsequent COVID instances, from January and February 2020. The latter occurrences occurred in regions of Wuhan with the largest population densities, in contrast to the cases from December 2019 that "mapped like a bullseye" on the market.

This indicates that the infection was not transmitting covertly, according to Worobey. The market was where it really started, and it expanded from there.

Worobey and his colleagues addressed the issue of whether health officials discovered instances surrounding the market merely because that's where they searched, which was a significant addition to their previous results.

It's crucial to understand that each of these situations included individuals who were located because they were being treated in a hospital, according to Worobey. "None of them were minor illnesses that might have been discovered by knocking on the doors of neighbours who lived close to the market and asking whether they were feeling sick. In other words, these patients were not registered based on their residence but rather because they were hospitalised."

Worobey's team went one step farther to eliminate any remaining chance of bias: They ran the stats again after starting at the market and gradually moved away from it as they started deleting cases from their analysis. The results were true even after excluding two-thirds of the instances.

The remaining instances resided closer to the market than what would be anticipated if there were no spatial association between these first COVID cases and the market, Worobey said. "Even in that situation, with the bulk of cases eliminated," he said.

After Huanan market was shut down, swab samples were gathered from market surfaces including flooring and cages. SARS-CoV-2 positive samples were substantially more frequent in areas with live animal markets.

Red foxes, hog badgers, and raccoon dogs were among the species sold alive at the Huanan market in the days before the first instances of COVID-19 were discovered, according to the researchers. These creatures are now known to be vulnerable to SARS-CoV-2. The researchers created a thorough market map and demonstrated a significant relationship between SARS-CoV-2-positive samples reported by Chinese researchers in early 2020 and the western section of the market, where live or recently slaughtered animals were traded in late 2019.

According to Andersen, a co-senior author of both studies and professor in the Department of Immunology and Microbiology at Scripps Research, "Upstream events are still obscure, but our analyses of available evidence clearly suggest that the pandemic arose from initial human infections from animals for sale at the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market in late November 2019."

Most likely, the virus spread from animals to people more than once.

Jonathan Pekar, Joel Wertheim, and Marc Suchard from the University of California, San Diego, together with Andersen and Worobey, co-led the second research, which examined SARS-CoV-2 genomic data from early patients.

Based on the oldest collected genomes, the researchers integrated epidemic modelling with early evolution investigations of the virus. They came to the conclusion that the pandemic, which at first featured two barely different SARS-CoV-2 lineages, most likely originated from at least two different infections of people by animals at the Huanan market in November and maybe December 2019. The studies also revealed that there were several other animal-to-human viral transmissions at the market during this time that did not emerge as registered COVID-19 cases.

The scientists developed a framework for the development of the SARS-CoV-2 viral lineages using a method known as molecular clock analysis, which relies on the regularity with which genetic changes take place across time. They discovered that the molecular clock data would be incompatible with a scenario in which the virus was just once introduced into people as opposed to many times. Previous research had shown that the virus's A lineage, which is closely linked to viral cousins in bats, gave birth to the B lineage. The two lineages most likely transitioned from animals to humans separately, both in the Huanan market, in accordance with the new evidence, according to Worobey.

If not, Worobey said, "lineage A would have had to have evolved more slowly than the lineage B virus, which simply doesn't make biological sense."

The two investigations show that COVID-19 spread from animals to people at the Huanan market, most likely after the animals had been exposed to coronavirus-carrying bats in the wild or on Chinese farms. According to the researchers, in order to reduce the danger of pandemics in the future, scientists and public authorities should work to get a better knowledge of the wildlife trade in China and other countries. They should also support more thorough testing of live animals sold in marketplaces.

The National Science Foundation and the National Institutes of Health both contributed funding to the study.


Post a Comment

0 Comments