China: SARS May Be Linked to Chlamydia-Like Agent

Reuters ^ | April 4, 2003

[syriacus]

BEIJING (Reuters) - China's center for disease control said on Friday it suspects a chlamydia-like agent caused an outbreak of a flu-like virus that has killed 82 people and infected over 2,400 worldwide.

"We're 80 percent sure," Hong Tao, a researcher with the Institute of Virology under the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention, told a news conference.

The center studied samples of victims' lungs, livers, kidneys and other organs which showed a chlamydia-like agent appeared to have caused the outbreak of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), Hong said.

[syriacus]

See also (on FR) SARS a combination of bacteria and virus

[AntiGuv]

I thought Chlamydia was sexually transmitted; wouldn't the epidemiological profile look completely different?

[jacquej]

Maybe someone who knows can help me here. I thought that chlamydia was a sexually transmitted diease. Given that frame of reference, how does it become airborne and capable of infecting people?

Does this suggest that this, if it is the causative agent in SARS, could be biowarfare, or an escape from a bioweapons research program?

Hoping some expert can explain this works.

[AFPhys]

Chlamydia is DEFINITELY an STD... this seems really strange to me now, if all I've heard is true.

[maestro]

Does this cross from animals to humans?

Is this from pigs?

?...from the... 'swine-flu-vaccine' ...?

[Bluntpoint]

Chlamydia? Isn't that name of Rev. Sharpton's daughter.

[aruanan]

I thought Chlamydia was sexually transmitted; wouldn't the epidemiological profile look completely different?

They said Chlamydia-like agent. The '-like' isn't referring to Chlamydia's mode of transmission as an STD any more than saying a particular disease was plague-like meant it was spread by rat-riding fleas.

[jammer]

Odd that Reuters would call Chlamydia a virus in the article. I suspect the author is in over his/her head.

[TooBusy]

Why the abreviated article?

China: SARS May Be Linked to Chlamydia-Like Agent
Fri April 4, 2003 09:49 AM ET
BEIJING (Reuters) - China's center for disease control said on Friday it suspects a chlamydia-like agent caused an outbreak of a flu-like virus that has killed 82 people and infected over 2,400 worldwide.

"We're 80 percent sure," Hong Tao, a researcher with the Institute of Virology under the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention, told a news conference.

The center studied samples of victims' lungs, livers, kidneys and other organs which showed a chlamydia-like agent appeared to have caused the outbreak of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), Hong said.

In Geneva, a spokesman for the World Health Organization said the U.N. agency was "99 percent" certain SARS was caused by a previously unknown strain belonging to the coronavirus family, a major cause of the common cold.

However, until it was absolutely certain, the possibility that some other virus, including chlamydia, also played a role could not be ruled out.

Hong told the Beijing news conference the agent most likely came from animals, but it was not known what kind.

SARS has killed 46 people and infected 1,191 in China since November when it first surfaced in the southern province of Guangdong, and then went on to spread around the globe in March. (Reporting by Dai Shasha in Beijing, Richard Waddington in Geneva)

[Cicero]

On an earlier thread, posters stated that although chlamydia is most familiar in its form as an STD, it can also take the form of an air-born germ causing pneumonia. In the case of SARS, it is not transmitted sexually, according to this theory, but through the air or presumably from infected surfaces, hands, etc.

[CathyRyan]

See

http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dbmd/diseaseinfo/chlamydiapneumonia_t.htm

[EternalHope]

As you know, the U.S. CDC is 99% sure SARS is a new viral variant from the corona virus family. It would seem that either the U.S. is wrong, or the Chinese are wrong.

Assuming the U.S. is right, the Chinese are either incompetent, or there are two different outbreaks. In other words, if we assume the Chinese are competent, then the original Chinese outbreak was NOT SARS.

Since China has lied repeatedly and been spectacularly uncooperative overall, it is important to remember:
We cannot yet prove that the Guangdong outbreak was actually SARS and not some other form of pneumonia.

If we assume that China has somehow decided to come clean, and that everything we are now hearing is completely true, then China was most likely hit by a new variant of Chlamydia, not SARS. This would also be consistent with the differing pattern of contagion and morbidity of the Hong Kong outbreak compared with the Guangdong outbreak.

If we choose to believe everything China is now saying, then the odds are very good (80%) that the Guangdong outbreak was a new variant of Chlamydia. The U.S. CDC says it is 99% sure SARS is a new variant of the corona virus family. If both groups are right, and they certainly could be, then we have two different diseases to deal with here.

[Mamzelle]

No, that's "Placenta Previa"

[EternalHope]

A potentially major factor affecting the public perception of SARS in the U.S. is the probable over-reporting of cases. Here in Washington, for example, all 7 reported cases of probable SARS may be reclassified as something else. A SARS case in Portland, OR, was reclassified yesterday.

This would not matter in a perfect world. But the practical effect right now is to create the public perception that SARS is no big deal.

That could make it more difficult for your typical politician to impose the kinds of isolation/quarantine that seem to be working in Singapore. Since that is the only proven way to keep this under control, I would hate to have our key decision makers misled into thinking SARS is less serious than it really is.

Another problem with over-reporting of cases is the creation of misleading statistics. Since the United States has over 100 reported cases, and no reported deaths, the press is already saying it is not that serious a disease. They seem to have missed the fact that the U.S. is reporting "suspected" cases, not confirmed cases. The true statistics are thus completely obscured.

Hong Kong has shown us how fast SARS can spread, and what it can do to its victims. We know the best/only defense at this stage is isolation/quarantine. I would hate to see over reporting at this early stage lead to reluctance to do what needs to be done when a true problem rears its head.

[maestro]

Your# 15).........................BTTT

Ping......pong?

Another problem with over-reporting of cases is the creation of misleading statistics. Since the United States has over 100 reported cases, and no reported deaths, the press is already saying it is not that serious a disease. They seem to have missed the fact that the U.S. is reporting "suspected" cases, not confirmed cases. The true statistics are thus completely obscured.

Hong Kong has shown us how fast SARS can spread, and what it can do to its victims. We know the best/only defense at this stage is isolation/quarantine. I would hate to see over reporting at this early stage lead to reluctance to do what needs to be done when a true problem rears its head.

WoW........VERY INTERESTING..........thank YOU for your input!

??...Question,...if 'two' diseases 'mixed together'.....
Can a diseased bacteria itself aslo be the carrier of a diseased virus?

(Your idea re: two strains......., BUT,....I add,...one a bacteria hosting a virus?)

[maestro]

BTTT......ping........BTTT

[MeekOneGOP]

[riri]

We cannot yet prove that the Guangdong outbreak was actually SARS and not some other form of pneumonia.

I think you may be right.

[Sweet_Sunflower29]

I am confused.

Forgive me if I don't remember this correctly, but it was my understanding that SARS was originally said to be a form of the virus which causes the common cold.

Can anyone tell me if the cold virus and clamydia virus really are *that* similiar?

And if truth be told, I'm finding myself becoming increasingly uneasy at hearing the daily SARS-related information.