Anthroponosis and risk management: a time for ethical vaccination of wildlife?
Anthroponosis and risk management: a time for ethical vaccination of wildlife?
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/s2666-5247(21)00081-1
复制
发表时间：
2021-06
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Santini JM
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Edwards SJ;Chatterjee HJ;Santini JM
SARS-CoV-2是如何起源并导致目前的大流行尚不清楚。虽然在非人类动物宿主中发现了基因相似的冠状病毒，但尚未发现中间宿主。SARS-CoV-2是一种适应人类的病毒，是人类感染的。考虑到该病毒的宿主范围很广，随着它的传播范围更广，它很可能会适应其他非人类动物宿主。一种天然存在的Asn 501 Tyr刺突蛋白变异，如在英国，南非和巴西的变体中所见，已经改变了向性，现在可以感染实验室小鼠和大鼠。2目前没有证据表明野生动物受到严重影响，考虑到目前没有可用的监测方案来产生这种证据，这一事实可能并不完全令人放心。如果有这样的证据，要成功地控制任何疫情可能为时已晚。等待社区传播在人类中的实质性证据使得后来的遏制努力几乎不可能。2021年对欧洲野生动物的风险评估得出结论，鉴于遏制水貂疫情的实际困难，现在存在不可逆转和重大损害的高风险。1户外密切接触目前不被认为是人与人之间气溶胶传播的高风险，这一事实不应意味着野生动物之间通过粪口机制、唾液和污染物实现的传播途径，如雪貂，3应被忽视。为所有人接种疫苗的目标是雄心勃勃的，昂贵的，耗时的，使得不可能确保所有接触脆弱野生动物的人都能及时接种疫苗。此外，目前还不清楚接种疫苗是否足以预防所有传播。此外，为生态旅游提供的疫苗护照可能被伪造或蔑视。与此同时，偷猎和非法野生动物贸易仍在继续。对非人类动物接种疫苗是一种更直接的保护策略，尽管存在争议。5早期采取了社交距离和个人防护设备等传统缓解措施，试图保护野生猿类免受人类传播。肯尼亚黑猩猩保护区的护林员采取了强有力的措施，6而政府正式禁止巨猿徒步旅行和穿越非洲的生态旅游，7并保护了直布罗陀欧洲唯一幸存的野生猴子。8然而，这些措施似乎不是没有得到普遍采用，就是没有效果。否则，新病例的确认就不会发生，尽管在动物园和农场主要是通过观察临床症状来提示的。1，9对于与野生类人猿密切合作的个体来说，即使没有明显的行动自由限制，野生动物和圈养动物之间的区别也变得模糊。再加上生活在数量很少但人口密集的家庭群体或社区中的物种，一旦引入，个体之间的疾病传播风险可能是毁灭性的。5，7倭黑猩猩和山地大猩猩只是物种的两个例子，其中每一个损失都会对物种的生存造成不利影响。就像人类一样，有些人可能比其他人更容易患上严重的疾病。在圣地亚哥动物园（美国加利福尼亚州），一只49岁的银背大猩猩是9只感染SARS-CoV-2的大猩猩之一，只有在实验性抗体治疗后才从严重疾病中恢复过来，未受影响的大猩猩已经接受了疫苗接种。9然而，为了给野生灵长类动物接种疫苗，需要将不可避免的相关压力降至最低，并需要制定有效的实施策略。有一个完整的…
How SARS-CoV-2 originated to cause the current pandemic is unknown. Although genetically similar coronaviruses have been identified in non-human animal reservoirs, no intermediate hosts have been identified. SARS-CoV-2 is a human-adapted virus and is anthroponotic. Considering that the virus has a broad host range, it is likely to adapt to other non-human animal hosts as it circulates more widely. 1 A naturally occurring Asn501Tyr spike protein variation, as seen in the UK, South African, and Brazilian variants, has altered tropism and can now infect laboratory mice and rats. 2 The fact that there is no current evidence to show that wildlife is substantially affected might not be altogether reassuring considering that there are currently no available surveillance programmes to generate such evidence. If such evidence were available, it could well be too late to contain any outbreaks successfully. Waiting for substantial evidence of community transmission in humans has made later containment efforts all but impossible. A 2021 risk assessment for European wildlife concluded that there is now a high risk of irreversible and substantial harm given the practical difficulties in containing outbreaks in mink. 1 The fact that close contact outdoors is not currently regarded as high risk for aerosol transmission between humans should not mean that transmission routes between wild animals enabled by faecal–oral mechanisms, saliva, and fomites, as shown for ferrets, 3 should be ignored. The goal to vaccinate all humans is ambitious, costly, and time consuming, making it impossible to ensure that all humans coming into contact with vulnerable wildlife would themselves be vaccinated in time. Additionally, it is unclear if vaccination would be enough to prevent all transmission. Moreover, vaccine passports to enable ecotourism could simply be forged or flouted. In the meantime, poaching and trading of illegal wildlife continues. 4 Vaccination of non-human animals is a more direct, if controversial, protective strategy. 5 Traditional mitigation measures of social distancing and personal protection equipment were adopted early to try to protect wild apes from human transmission. Rangers at chimpanzee sanctuaries in Kenya took robust measures, 6 while governments officially banned great ape trekking and ecotourism across Africa, 7 and shielded Europe’s only surviving wild monkeys in Gibraltar. 8 However, such measures seem to have been either not universally adopted or have been ineffective. Otherwise, the confirmation of new cases would not be occurring, albeit in zoos and farms largely prompted by observing clinical signs. 1, 9 For individuals who work closely with wild great apes, the distinction between wild and captive animals becomes blurred even without apparent constraints on their freedom of movement. Coupled with species living in very few but densely populated family groups or communities, the risk of disease transmission between individuals once introduced could be devastating. 5, 7 Bonobos and mountain gorillas are but two examples of species in which every loss would be detrimental to the survival of the species. Just as in humans, some might be more susceptible to severe disease than others. At the San Diego zoo (CA, USA), a 49-year-old silverback gorilla, one of the nine infected with SARS-CoV-2, recovered from severe disease only after experimental antibody treatment, and the unaffected great apes have received vaccinations. 9 However, to administer vaccines to primates in the wild, the inevitable associated stress would need to be minimised and effective implementation strategies would need to be developed. Having a fully …