Marek's disease and humans

[Kiki]

Thanks. Reading.
Too dang early to be studying cow STDs...

It's not just cow stds. LOL

 

[Folly's place]

Very interesting article, again, with lots more data needed to really draw conclusions. Staying healthy is the best plan!
Mary

 

[Molpet]

so more reasons to not let people on my property... they may not even have ever seen a live poultry bird and could still be carrying something that could infect my flock

of course the wild birds are a more likely vector

 

[Tesumph]

Before I say anything, first reread bits of that article and take special note of how many times they use the word “may,” “might be,” “associated,” etc.. This is an academic article that is HIGHLY theoretical with no actual experimentation done. To their credit they did source their “maybe” claims, but it is ridiculously easy to gather 100 whackjob sources (most of which won’t be used or even read all the way through) and throw together a hypothetical essay that makes it sound like the next Ebola is upon us.
I’ve written my own skewed academic articles this way, although mine were clearly theoretical for the sake of assignments and research, and not published in any way as a medical article. This is how breaking news comes up with “starlight proven to cause cancer” and other ridiculous headlines.

That being said, this is an important paragraph. Note the use of “may” and “capacity.”
“Indeed, the ability of trichomonads to live on a variety of mucosal tissues may be the key to their wide host range and ability to develop infections at different body sites, as well as contribute directly or indirectly to pathologies. Once the capacity to thrive on vertebrate mucosal surfaces has developed, there may be less of a barrier to cross both species and mucosal sites. For example, in the case of T. foetus, this sexually transmitted species may represent a recent transfer from the digestive to the urogenital tract, with a capacity of the parasite to thrive in the gut in different species (e.g., pigs, cats, and dogs).“

So YES, certain host specific Trichonomads HAVE been found in other species!... in their mucous membranes.
That means that any animal that eats the placenta of an infected cow, or licks the snot of an infected chicken, COULD potentially ingest that animal’s trichonomad and allow it to live in its stomach lining, gut flora, nasal passages, whatever. But it would not do anything, because that species of Trichonomad wasn’t designed to live in that animal. So it will just passively survive until it is somehow killed, flushed out, shed, or the host dies. The point of that article is to say that trichonomads have the evolutionary POTENTIAL to evolve and become multi-host parasites.
Also note how trichonomads can “contribute indirectly to pathologies,” implying that you can find a harmful species in a place it doesn’t belong while searching for something totally irrelevant to the parasite. That doesn’t make them zoonotic, as their presence alone is not equivalent to having the appropriate disease.

But an even more important paragraph is in the closing remarks..
“Although we have discussed several recent studies that provide strong evidence for the zoonotic origin and potential of trichomonads, regular and sustained zoonotic transmission of these microbes has yet to be definitively established.“

So they (thankfully) do acknowledge that this is all just speculation, and go on to detail how one would go about gathering actual evidence for zoonotic transmission. Strong evidence and potential for something means nothing if it doesn’t ever happen.

 

[Folly's place]

Like I said...
Mary

 

[Glitterchicks]

Before I say anything, first reread bits of that article and take special note of how many times they use the word “may,” “might be,” “associated,” etc.. This is an academic article that is HIGHLY theoretical with no actual experimentation done. To their credit they did source their “maybe” claims, but it is ridiculously easy to gather 100 whackjob sources (most of which won’t be used or even read all the way through) and throw together a hypothetical essay that makes it sound like the next Ebola is upon us.
I’ve written my own skewed academic articles this way, although mine were clearly theoretical for the sake of assignments and research, and not published in any way as a medical article. This is how breaking news comes up with “starlight proven to cause cancer” and other ridiculous headlines.

That being said, this is an important paragraph. Note the use of “may” and “capacity.”
“Indeed, the ability of trichomonads to live on a variety of mucosal tissues may be the key to their wide host range and ability to develop infections at different body sites, as well as contribute directly or indirectly to pathologies. Once the capacity to thrive on vertebrate mucosal surfaces has developed, there may be less of a barrier to cross both species and mucosal sites. For example, in the case of T. foetus, this sexually transmitted species may represent a recent transfer from the digestive to the urogenital tract, with a capacity of the parasite to thrive in the gut in different species (e.g., pigs, cats, and dogs).“

So YES, certain host specific Trichonomads HAVE been found in other species!... in their mucous membranes.
That means that any animal that eats the placenta of an infected cow, or licks the snot of an infected chicken, COULD potentially ingest that animal’s trichonomad and allow it to live in its stomach lining, gut flora, nasal passages, whatever. But it would not do anything, because that species of Trichonomad wasn’t designed to live in that animal. So it will just passively survive until it is somehow killed, flushed out, shed, or the host dies. The point of that article is to say that trichonomads have the evolutionary POTENTIAL to evolve and become multi-host parasites.
Also note how trichonomads can “contribute indirectly to pathologies,” implying that you can find a harmful species in a place it doesn’t belong while searching for something totally irrelevant to the parasite. That doesn’t make them zoonotic, as their presence alone is not equivalent to having the appropriate disease.

But an even more important paragraph is in the closing remarks..
“Although we have discussed several recent studies that provide strong evidence for the zoonotic origin and potential of trichomonads, regular and sustained zoonotic transmission of these microbes has yet to be definitively established.“

So they (thankfully) do acknowledge that this is all just speculation, and go on to detail how one would go about gathering actual evidence for zoonotic transmission. Strong evidence and potential for something means nothing if it doesn’t ever happen.

Thanks for breaking it down. This answers a lot of my own questions and verifies some of my initial assumptions. BRAVO!

 

[Pugsabi]

Too many words, not enough pictures for me to read through all these articles.

I just want to know how anyone would explain having chicken herpes to a new beau!

Or the 3:00 a.m. infomercials!
Have you or someone you love been diagnosed with chicken herpes? If so, you might be entitled to compensation.

 

[Glitterchicks]

Too many words, not enough pictures for me to read through all these articles.

I just want to know how anyone would explain having chicken herpes to a new beau!

Or the 3:00 a.m. infomercials!
Have you or someone you love been diagnosed with chicken herpes? If so, you might be entitled to compensation.

 

[Kiki]

Before I say anything, first reread bits of that article and take special note of how many times they use the word “may,” “might be,” “associated,” etc.. This is an academic article that is HIGHLY theoretical with no actual experimentation done. To their credit they did source their “maybe” claims, but it is ridiculously easy to gather 100 whackjob sources (most of which won’t be used or even read all the way through) and throw together a hypothetical essay that makes it sound like the next Ebola is upon us.
I’ve written my own skewed academic articles this way, although mine were clearly theoretical for the sake of assignments and research, and not published in any way as a medical article. This is how breaking news comes up with “starlight proven to cause cancer” and other ridiculous headlines.

That being said, this is an important paragraph. Note the use of “may” and “capacity.”
“Indeed, the ability of trichomonads to live on a variety of mucosal tissues may be the key to their wide host range and ability to develop infections at different body sites, as well as contribute directly or indirectly to pathologies. Once the capacity to thrive on vertebrate mucosal surfaces has developed, there may be less of a barrier to cross both species and mucosal sites. For example, in the case of T. foetus, this sexually transmitted species may represent a recent transfer from the digestive to the urogenital tract, with a capacity of the parasite to thrive in the gut in different species (e.g., pigs, cats, and dogs).“

So YES, certain host specific Trichonomads HAVE been found in other species!... in their mucous membranes.
That means that any animal that eats the placenta of an infected cow, or licks the snot of an infected chicken, COULD potentially ingest that animal’s trichonomad and allow it to live in its stomach lining, gut flora, nasal passages, whatever. But it would not do anything, because that species of Trichonomad wasn’t designed to live in that animal. So it will just passively survive until it is somehow killed, flushed out, shed, or the host dies. The point of that article is to say that trichonomads have the evolutionary POTENTIAL to evolve and become multi-host parasites.
Also note how trichonomads can “contribute indirectly to pathologies,” implying that you can find a harmful species in a place it doesn’t belong while searching for something totally irrelevant to the parasite. That doesn’t make them zoonotic, as their presence alone is not equivalent to having the appropriate disease.

But an even more important paragraph is in the closing remarks..
“Although we have discussed several recent studies that provide strong evidence for the zoonotic origin and potential of trichomonads, regular and sustained zoonotic transmission of these microbes has yet to be definitively established.“

So they (thankfully) do acknowledge that this is all just speculation, and go on to detail how one would go about gathering actual evidence for zoonotic transmission. Strong evidence and potential for something means nothing if it doesn’t ever happen.

When my company leaves I will reread this and that.

 

[Kiki]

Notice the question mark by the mites.
https://veterinaryresearch.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13567-016-0404-3