Talk:Spillover infection

Wiki Education assignment: ENGW3303 Adv Writing for Environmental Professions 151266
— Assignment last updated by WritingTeacherC (talk) 19:30, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

Editing
I will be editing this article by defining more of the commonly used phrasing that might not be clear to people from a broader audience, adding a history of spillover zoonoses section, and add pictures. SunshineSeaspray (talk) 17:46, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

COVID
A couple of my edits were reverted. I have re-reverted them.

(1) I removed COVID as an example of a disease that is not endemic to humans. The claim that it has at most very limited chains of transmission in humans is patently false and therefor I do not need to have a cite to a source to edit it out.

(2) I removed COVID as an example of a zoonotic disease and the claim that it’s source is bats. There is a source that was cited but, that article contradicts itself. It does say in the abstract that COVID was zoonotic. But then later says that “Although it is impossible to exclude the possibility of voluntary manipulation of the SARS-COV-2 virus, the zoonotic transmission seems to be far more likely.” and “The zoonotic transmission is still plausible.” So this article doesn’t support the contention that COVID was definitely zoonotic.

verifiable, reliable sources say that while most scientists think that zoonosis is more likely, a lab origin is also plausible, so this is a very bad candidate for inclusion in this article as a disease that is definitely zoonotic. Should be removed or this qualification should be added. I think it’s preferable to remove since it’s definitely not a clear cut example.

“At this moment, the exact origin of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic that started out from the Wuhan prefecture in China is not fully understood yet. Although it is impossible to exclude the possibility of voluntary manipulation of the SARS-COV-2 virus, the zoonotic transmission seems to be far more likely. [1] Namely, genome sequencing revealed 96% concordance between human the SARS-CoV-2 virus and SARS-CoV-like strains isolated from bats thus strongly confirming that SARS-CoV-2 originates from bats as primary hosts. [1] The spike proteins found on the surface of these bat strains, however, show a weak affinity towards human angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE) receptors. [1] The zoonotic transmission is still plausible, as other SARS-CoV-like pathogens identified in Malayan pangolins—which were illegally smuggled into Guangdong province—show a much higher affinity to human receptors. [1]”

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8404404/ JustinReilly (talk) 21:41, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
 * In the future, please follow WP:BRD. COVID-19 has been included as an example here for ~3 months: . You are editing away from the status quo, and thus you should wait to remove the material until you have consensus to do so. The best available and most-recently published sources (e.g. peer-reviewed secondary articles authored by experts published in topic-relevant expert-edited academic journals) support a zoonotic origin as the most likely for COVID-19. Per WP:SOURCETYPES and WP:MEDSCI, these are exactly how we determine what we say in wiki-voice on Wikipedia. Further, even if an original "crossover" event involved any researchers working in the wild or in the lab with wild samples, it would still be a "zoonotic" virus. See, for example: Marburg virus.
 * It is almost certain that the virus originated in bats and crossed species to humans either directly or indirectly via intermediary hosts
 * The increasing scientific evidence concerning the origins of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) is most consistent with a zoonotic origin and a spillover pathway from wildlife to people via wildlife farming and the wildlife trade
 * As with other coronaviruses, SARS-CoV-2 emergence likely resulted from multiple zoonotic events.
 * As for the vast majority of human viruses, the most parsimonious explanation for the origin of SARS-CoV-2 is a zoonotic event...There is currently no evidence that SARS-CoV-2 has a laboratory origin. There is no evidence that any early cases had any connection to the WIV, in contrast to the clear epidemiological links to animal markets in Wuhan, nor evidence that the WIV possessed or worked on a progenitor of SARS-CoV-2 prior to the pandemic.
 * The most plausible origin of SARS-CoV-2 is natural selection of the virus in an animal host followed by zoonotic transfer.
 * The only remaining rational option for the origin of SARS-CoV-2, is that of a naturally occurring virus circulating in the wild which came into contact with humans.
 * The current weight of evidence suggests that SARS-CoV-2, or its progenitor, probably emerged in humans from a zoonotic source in Wuhan, China, where it was first identified in 2019. Although evidence on the origins of SARS-CoV-2 are inconclusive, bats have been suggested to be the most probable evolutionary source for the virus
 * The pandemic of Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) has highlighted bats as reservoirs of coronaviruses that cause severe respiratory diseases in humans and, frequently, in other animals. However, despite the spillover events of SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, the implication of bats as natural reservoirs of the ancient virus of SARS-CoV-2 is, to date, unconfirmed, as only closely related SARS-like viruses have been detected by genomic sequencing and little is known about the mechanisms of host switch from bats to humans
 * The most plausible origin of SARS-CoV-2 is natural selection of the virus in an animal host followed by zoonotic transfer.
 * The only remaining rational option for the origin of SARS-CoV-2, is that of a naturally occurring virus circulating in the wild which came into contact with humans.
 * The current weight of evidence suggests that SARS-CoV-2, or its progenitor, probably emerged in humans from a zoonotic source in Wuhan, China, where it was first identified in 2019. Although evidence on the origins of SARS-CoV-2 are inconclusive, bats have been suggested to be the most probable evolutionary source for the virus
 * The pandemic of Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) has highlighted bats as reservoirs of coronaviruses that cause severe respiratory diseases in humans and, frequently, in other animals. However, despite the spillover events of SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, the implication of bats as natural reservoirs of the ancient virus of SARS-CoV-2 is, to date, unconfirmed, as only closely related SARS-like viruses have been detected by genomic sequencing and little is known about the mechanisms of host switch from bats to humans
 * The current weight of evidence suggests that SARS-CoV-2, or its progenitor, probably emerged in humans from a zoonotic source in Wuhan, China, where it was first identified in 2019. Although evidence on the origins of SARS-CoV-2 are inconclusive, bats have been suggested to be the most probable evolutionary source for the virus
 * The pandemic of Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) has highlighted bats as reservoirs of coronaviruses that cause severe respiratory diseases in humans and, frequently, in other animals. However, despite the spillover events of SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, the implication of bats as natural reservoirs of the ancient virus of SARS-CoV-2 is, to date, unconfirmed, as only closely related SARS-like viruses have been detected by genomic sequencing and little is known about the mechanisms of host switch from bats to humans
 * The pandemic of Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) has highlighted bats as reservoirs of coronaviruses that cause severe respiratory diseases in humans and, frequently, in other animals. However, despite the spillover events of SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, the implication of bats as natural reservoirs of the ancient virus of SARS-CoV-2 is, to date, unconfirmed, as only closely related SARS-like viruses have been detected by genomic sequencing and little is known about the mechanisms of host switch from bats to humans


 * Based on all of the above, we should list the virus here in this page. We could qualify the reservoir as "bats (unconfirmed)". Even if a lab were somehow involved, the fact that it is overwhelmingly a "natural" virus that existed at some point in bats, it would still be a "spillover". As with Marburg virus, which came from monkeys, but did notably also cross-over into humans from monkeys in the lab in Marburg, Germany in a BSL4 lab. — Shibboleth ink  (♔ ♕) 16:13, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been listed at WP:FTN, WikiProject COVID-19, and WikiProject Viruses.— Shibboleth ink  (♔ ♕) 16:27, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Yeah I think a qualification is necessary - we still don't know the exact mechanism and while the most likely explanation is bats, pangolins and palm civets could have also been the culprits. LegalSmeagolian (talk) 16:55, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
 * I agree with Shibbolethink. I am convinced by the detailed source analysis. Thank you for taking the time to put that together. – Novem Linguae (talk) 17:02, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
 * WP:NPOV says, All encyclopedic content on Wikipedia must be written from a neutral point of view (NPOV), which means representing fairly, proportionately, and, as far as possible, without editorial bias, all the significant views that have been published by reliable sources on a topic. Zoonotic covid is clearly a significant view, and simply removing it is totally out of the question. However, NPOV also says, Avoid stating seriously contested assertions as facts. The article should be clear that a zoonotic origin is most likely, but it is not proven, and the species of origin is unknown. Sennalen (talk) 16:55, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Do we think SARS-CoV-2 being a zoonotic virus (as the topic starter said) is "seriously contested"?
 * That said, this article is specifically about the spillover infection, so I could see room to make a cite-note that describes the details that the original reservoir is probably bats, and the spillover may have been though an intermediate host, with the associated citations to provide this detail. Bakkster Man (talk) 19:50, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
 * "Covid probably has a zoonotic origin," is not seriously contested.
 * "Covid has a zoonotic origin," is seriously contested. Sennalen (talk) 20:53, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
 * I could see room to make a cite-note that describes the details that the original reservoir is probably bats, and the spillover may have been though an intermediate host, with the associated citations to provide this detail. Definitely this sounds like a good idea. We could use many of the cites above, such as:
 * Thoughts?— Shibboleth ink  (♔ ♕) 22:16, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Exactly the kind of thing I was thinking, but better than I would have written it. Bakkster Man (talk) 22:45, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Seems fine. Sennalen (talk) 00:51, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Seems fine. Sennalen (talk) 00:51, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

The first of my two edits has been reverted again, even though there is absolutely no justification for it and no attempt at a justification has been made- ie no reason has been given other than perhaps that the text I deleted has existed in the article for 3 months. Here again is the reason I deleted it: “I removed COVID as an example of a disease that is not endemic to humans. The claim that it has at most very limited chains of transmission in humans is patently false and therefor I do not need to have a cite to a source to edit it out.” SARS-2 has caused hundreds of millions of cases of COVID in humans. This is patently more than a “very limited chain of transmission.” I have reverted.

I will refrain from reverting my second edit (COVID/BATS in the list of zoonotic spillovers and reservoir host) until we have discussed. JustinReilly (talk) 20:17, 22 February 2023 (UTC)


 * I agree here, COVID-19 should be listed alongside HIV/AIDS as a spillover that resulted in sustained, rather than limited, transmission. Bakkster Man (talk) 20:45, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
 * agreed with sustained. I have added it to that part of the paragraph along with HIV/AIDS. — Shibboleth ink  (♔ ♕) 22:08, 22 February 2023 (UTC)


 * I think User:Shibbolethink strikes the right note here. I would support mentioning the possible intermediate hosts, maybe in a footnote. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 00:46, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
 * I have implemented the refn as written above. Thanks everybody! — Shibboleth ink  (♔ ♕) 15:50, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Advanced Writing Science 2023
— Assignment last updated by SocksTheKitty (talk) 01:38, 14 October 2023 (UTC)