Speculation on SARS Origins 34
JediJeremy writes "Nature has this article on the possibility that the SARS virus is a cross between mammal and bird viruses. The article does go on to say that this is totally speculation and that a mammal virus could have mutated. But it raises some interesting points, such as a possible new bio-terror weapon."
Re:Come on! its the chinese! (Score:1, Offtopic)
We thought about quarantining Canada too, but then again, we need your hockey players (but your country doesn't have much use besides that).
Those icky people eat snakes and cats, and it were the poor kittens in cages where SARS started out from.
Right. And plenty of North Americans eat cows and chickens. What exactly is your point? I'm sure vegeterians find you "icky" too for eating meat. There's nothing inherently
Re:Come on! its the chinese! (Score:1)
wow .. almost as close-minded as the origional posters comment about eating snakes and cats ...
"What exactly is your point? I'm sure vegeterians find you "icky" too for eating meat. There's nothing inherently "different" in the meat in snakes and cat - but your close-mindedness simply believes so."
Re:Come on! its the chinese! (Score:1, Interesting)
Actually, I read that post not as flamebait, but as a humourously sarcastic detailing of what you'd likely hear when speaking on the subject to an alarmingly high percentage of the population.
There are, however, certain justifications for claiming that asian and african countries in general tend to have attitudes that lead to the easier spread of disease.
Re:Come on! its the chinese! (Score:1, Flamebait)
> for claiming that asian and african
> countries in general tend to have attitudes
> that lead to the easier spread of disease.
Yeah, like being really stupid. That's why we
forgot that we invented money, paper,
explosives, china, the compass, domesticated
animals and agriculture.
Re:Come on! its the chinese! (Score:2)
are flamebaiters. ROTFLMAOASMOOMN.
Beagle (Score:1, Funny)
Now, where did I leave my tinfoil mouthpiece?
Unlikely (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Unlikely (Score:1)
(Grats on the news post bro
Re:Unlikely (Score:4, Informative)
All you need to get recombination between virual 'species' is a double infection or a single cell ie a bird and mammal virus infect the same cell at the same time (an unlikely event but given the numbers of virus sloshing around happens from time to time). When they replecate there is a lot of 'naked' viral genomic DNA which spends a lot of time recombining with the host genome and each other (assuming they have sequences in common).
The accumulation of random mutations is much more likely, especially considering that viruses have very few defenses agains mutation, and little, if any, DNA (or RNA) repair mechanisms.Absolutly true the virus has no repair mechanisms OTOH the host cell which they hijack to replecate in has all the DNA repair mechanisms it needs (I don't think there are RNA repair mechaninisms for obvious reasons).
In any case the conclusions are based on sequence comparison it is very unlikely that a mamalian gene randomly mutated to look like a bird virus gene
Diploid viruses can recombine (Score:3, Informative)
I bet there will turn out to be other totally epigenetic mechanisms for a virus to be changed by the vector it travels though as well.
Re:Unlikely (Score:5, Informative)
Virus 'live' in animal or human cells. There are a lot of virus which are 'similar' to easch other. Especially influenza virus are of that kind.
Its well known that pigs, humans, chickens and ducks and likely other birds are breeding ground for influenza virus.
(In europe e.g. it is forbidden to raise pigs and chicken together in the same stable
The reason is, chicken influenza virus can live and breed in pig and vice versa.
Often they are harmless for the animals, but not for humans. If a chicken is infected by two different virus, the virus crossbreed, creating a new virus. Heck, what do you think from where every year the "new" influenza is comming from? And what do you think why you have to inoculate every winter again?
Influence is likely the most dangerous virus on planet, with the most different strands and the highest "mutation" rate. What you call mutating is primaryly crossbreeding.
I really wonder why a magazine like nature with that reputation calls that "speculative". Its a well known fact that SARS is a crossbreed of bird and pig virus, just like most influenza spreading every winter over north europe and north america.
Crossbreeding happens in this way: a animal s infected with more than one influenza virus. So its cells create "virus particle". The virus particle combine to virus, just like Drexlers nanotech dream. They self assemble. During assembly all particles which are "compatible" combine, regardless of the source they sprang from. A lot dont 'work' as virus after wards, but some become completely new virus, often VERY dangerous.
angel'o'sphere
Re:Unlikely (Score:2)
Yep. As far as i remember, this is how the 'spanish influenza', which killed litteral
SARS not a danger much longer... (Score:5, Interesting)
No, actually the article does not touch on this.
But don't worry, in the lab where I work we already have a treatment against sars in production and nearing the clinical trial stage.
Sars won't be an effective bio-terrorism weapon for much longer. All you hypochondriacs can breathe a sigh of relief.
Re:SARS not a danger much longer... (Score:2, Interesting)
And where might that be?
Re:SARS not a danger much longer... (Score:2)
Re:SARS not a danger much longer... (Score:2)
Re:SARS not a danger much longer... (Score:2)
Look around you can find out who we are. We were the first to create a synthetic version of the spike protein from the sequence someone else had obtained.
Bio-terror? (Score:2)
But it raises some interesting points, such as a possible new bio-terror weapon.
Not as I post this. Did something slip down the memory hole?
artificial origin (Score:1, Interesting)
with the massive amounts of research we have going on right now with the virii (using them to fight cancer; finding cure for AIDS; studying influenza; sequencing virii's DNA) it's possible that we might have artificially produced SARS or have abused a population of some virus to the point that the population experienced a high mutation rate (e.g. if we tagged them with radiation-produced molecules, whi
Re:artificial origin (Score:4, Informative)
with the massive amounts of research we have going on right now with the virii (using them to fight cancer; finding cure for AIDS; studying influenza; sequencing virii's DNA) it's possible that we might have artificially produced SARS or have abused a population of some virus to the point that the population experienced a high mutation rate (e.g. if we tagged them with radiation-produced molecules, which is common practice for studying their spread in an animal)"
This is unlikely, since the SARS-CoV is not more closely related to any known type of coronavirus than any other [sciencemag.org]. If it were a modified virus it should be very similar to a known class of coronavirus.
U.S. GOVT involvement with SARS? (Score:2, Funny)
Re:U.S. GOVT involvement with SARS? (Score:1)
Re:U.S. GOVT involvement with SARS? (Score:1)
use your fear (Score:3, Funny)
There goes my Christmas BBQ! (Score:3, Funny)
Damn! There go my Christmas barbeque plans. How the heck am I going to keep up my reputation without my signature ferret badger brule' [badgers.org.uk] ?
I mean, Turducken [chefpaul.com] is sooo 2002, and do you know how big a freezer you'd need for the leftovers from just one Stuffed Camel [bertc.com]?
I guess we're going to have to fall back on the barn cats [maddogproductions.com]. Again.