Researchers refer to the first Marburg virus outbreak as a “laborique.”Here’s why the experts backlashed

A researcher has tweeted what he calls “fun facts” about the life-threatening Marburg virus that is currently spreading in Tanzania and Equatorial Guinea. posted on Twitter was “too funny” or didn’t think it provided all the relevant facts.

The Marburg virus itself is certainly no fun.it belongs to the same Filoviridae It belongs to the same family as the Ebola virus and is similar in many very bad ways. Any resemblance to the Ebola virus is usually a bad thing. You are like the Ebola virus. ” as i explained forbes August 2022, for Marburg disease (MVD), case fatality rates range from 24% to 88%. Tanzania has so far declared its first-ever outbreak of her MVD, with eight cases and five deaths reported. This was a month after Equatorial Guinea announced nine infections and seven deaths for the first time since February. It is true that these outbreaks are a real public health concern.

Here is another fact. Scientists have long believed that the origin of the Marburg virus was spontaneous. I thought the outbreak among humans was the result of the virus jumping from other animals. The World Health Organization (WHO) clearly states: “Rousettus aegyptiacus Bats are considered natural hosts for the Marburg virus. The virus first came to the attention of the scientific community in 1967 when an outbreak occurred in Marburg and Frankfurt, Germany. This led the scientist to name it the Marburg virus, although in theory he could have also named it the Frankfurt virus. As the WHO highlights, this his 1967 outbreak “was associated with laboratory work with African green monkeys (Cercopithecus aethiops) imported from Uganda. ” There is no real scientific proof that the virus was created in any way in a laboratory.

< position="inread" progressive="" ad-id="article-0-inread" aria-hidden="true" role="presentation"/>

Dr. Justin Kinney, An associate professor at Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory and a member of the Cancer Center, he didn’t mention the monkey business. tweeted as March 25: “Interesting fact: The Marburg virus is named after Marburg, Germany, where the virus does not occur naturally. Because it was caused by a leak.” His tweet drew a lot of “oh he didn’t” type reactions from various experts around the world who have considerable experience in researching viruses and outbreaks as a whole. caused it.

for example, Isabella Eckerle, MD, DTMHProfessor and Co-Director, Center for Emerging Virus Diseases, University of Geneva Tweet response Calling what Kinney posted “fake news. The virus did not escape from a lab in Marburg, but was transmitted to lab workers via sick monkeys in Uganda. It was important as an animal model.”

Dr. Gigi Mercury GromvalHe is a Senior Fellow at the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security and an Associate Professor of Environmental Health Engineering at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. Answered Kinney Fun Facts“This is absolutely wrong. Why would you make it up?”

after that I got this “fun fact” reply From Dr. Björn Meyer, Virologist at Otto von Gerike University: [sic] how it was omitted Infected green monkeys from Uganda were shipped to Germany and (later) Yugoslavia. At that time, virology did not work there. I think you actually don’t like the animal transport part, do you?!” It should be noted that in 1967, in what was then Yugoslavia, he also had an epidemic of MVD.

As a final example, Dr. Angela RasmussenA virologist at the University of Saskatchewan in Canada, Vaccines and Infectious Diseases Mechanism, clearly disagreed with the humor or factuality of Kinney’s tweet. This “funny fact” is neither funny nor true when it comes to emerging viruses.

Yeah, it’s all a fun game until someone uses the word “laborique.” It has been suggested by those who attempt to claim that Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) was bioengineered in a laboratory in Wuhan, China, and accidentally or deliberately released into the human population. Some politicians and public figures have so far pushed the “gain-of-function” claims of such laboratories without providing much concrete supporting evidence. We use the term “laboratory leak” to describe such a scenario. , many public health experts agree that the origins of the Covid-19 pandemic deserve further investigation.) Many believe that the term “lab leak” suggests that the virus was created in a lab. may come to mind.

Does the term “laborique” absolutely mean anything made in a lab? In different contexts, the word “laborique” can theoretically mean different things. Some might think that such terms also apply to the accidental release of a virus that has already naturally acquired the ability to infect humans. It may mean that But these days, with people spreading misinformation and disinformation and politicizing viruses and public health, when we use lab-related terms when talking about outbreaks, epidemics, or pandemics, what do we mean? In other words, beware of using the term “laborique” without being clear about what it specifically means.

Rasmussen felt that the term “laborique” was not appropriate in the context of the 1967 MVD outbreak.She pointed out that the term “lab-obtained” would be more appropriate instead. in the next tweet: “The first outbreak of Marburg was acquired in a lab, but it was not a lab escape in this situation because they didn’t know they were dealing with Marburg.”Lab Leak” or “Lab “Escape” represents an infection acquired by the lab through deliberate manipulation of that particular pathogen. ”

After a less-than-positive response to his March 25 “lab leak” tweet, Kinney later claimed that the 1967 Marburg virus outbreak was due to a bioengineered or laboratory-modified virus. I made it clear that I didn’t mean to imply that there was. For example, the next day on his March 26th, he tweeted about the outbreak and replied:This was the first documented outbreak of the Marburg virus. This is not the source of the Marburg virus, it existed in the wild and still exists today.Kinney continued to argue that the use of the term “laborique” was appropriate.The outbreak has been attributed to research-related activities.it’s a laborique,” and “Zoonotic diseases from animals captured and studied for research purposes are laboratory leaks”

In general, the semantics are Rousettus aegyptiacus A bat comes home. There is no doubt that we need to ensure that scientific facilities around the world are safe so that infectious agents do not accidentally enter or leave the laboratory. Most infectious disease researchers probably don’t want to put themselves and their families at risk. It should not. Governments, universities, and other responsible organizations should ensure that infectious agents are handled properly and carefully with appropriate precautions. Also, one should not assume that the laboratory is as safe as possible. It is certainly worthwhile for countries around the world to overhaul their laboratory safety practices and regulations to prevent future real disasters from occurring.

At the same time, be wary of terminology that’s been circulating lately. There’s little doubt that “laborique” has become a politically hot term. Therefore, whenever we use the word “laborique,” it is important to immediately clarify what we specifically mean. There is a word These include words like “positive test”, “crab”, “urine everywhere” and of course “laboratory leak”. Don’t just say, “By the way, my test was positive” without a little more explanation. You may want to clarify whether it was a type of crustacean. Similarly, when referring to the word “lab” and the origin of the Marburg virus, make it clear that you are not implying that the virus was created in a lab. After all, it makes sense to do so.