Newborns infected with a novel novel coronavirus: viral load 51,000 times higher than other patients

With the emergence of novel coronavirus vaccine, this thought that the epidemic will be better, but did not think that the mutant novel coronavirus is coming again, the United States a newborn body detected a new variant of the virus.

According to foreign media reports, a new variant novel coronavirus was found in a newborn with severe COVID-19 received by Children’s National Medical Center in Washington, US, and its viral load was much higher than that of other patients.

Researchers said the new strain of the virus came from a severely ill newborn born in September last year at Children’s National Medical Center in Washington, the United States, after sequencing the virus genome of the sample recently discovered the new strain.
Astonishingly, the viral load of the sample was 51,418 times higher than the other samples.

It is unclear how high the risk of transmission of the new variant is, but other studies of the novel coronavirus variant in children have found eight additional cases of the variant in the mid-Atlantic region of the United States.

Roberta Debiasi, chief of the division of infectious diseases at Children’s National Medical Center in Washington, noted that the mutated virus has an entirely new structure of the spike protein, which may make it more infectious.

It is not clear whether the new mutation is related to the high viral load in newborn samples, but it is presumed that they are closely related.
Of course, this could also be a coincidence, so further study of the mutated virus is needed.

Children with CoviD-19 had a lower incidence of severe illness, and these younger children were less likely to be infected with novel coronavirus, according to the data.
At present, the mechanism of the effect of novel coronavirus on children and infants remains to be further studied.

But in the past five months, according to the American Academy of Pediatrics and the Association of Children’s Hospitals, there has been a “dramatic increase” in the number of children infected with novel coronavirus. Severe cases in children are rare but persist, and there are serious and long-term side effects, including brain damage.

South Korea extends UK flight ban for another two weeks to guard against entry of mutant novel coronavirus

On February 24 news, South Korea central prevention epidemic countermeasure this department expresses on 24 days, to prevent mutation coronavirus to pass into territory strictly, the ban that Han government decides to take in the light of British flight extends two weeks again to next month 11 days.

South Korea has suspended flights to and from the UK since December 23 and has extended the measure several times.
The mutant novel coronavirus found in the UK was found in 94 countries and territories as of December 15, according to WHO data.
Of the 128 mutated cases in South Korea, 109 were infected with the strain found in Britain.

A new strain of Covid-19 virus has been found in Nigeria, spreading to many countries

A new strain of COVID-19 virus, known as B.1.525, has been found in Nigeria and has spread to several other countries, and has not yet been classified as a strain of concern, the director of Nigeria’s Centre for Disease Control, Ikowizu, said in Abuja on February 22.
It has been reported that the B.1.525novel coronavirus variant contains a gene variant called E484K, which has been found in countries including Brazil, South Africa, Denmark and the United States.

Is it bacteria or viruses?Mycoplasma pneumoniae should not be ignored

Pneumonia is a disease with a high incidence in clinical practice, mostly caused by various pathogenic bacteria infection.
Symptoms include cough, sputum, fever, chest pain and so on, which require anti-infection treatment against pathogenic bacteria.
The pathogenic bacteria that causes pneumonia is bacterium for the most part, have pneumoniae streptococcus, staphylococcus aureus, haemophilus influenzae, pseudomonas aeruginosa, pneumoniae klebsiella to wait commonly.
Atypical pathogenic bacteria include mycoplasma, chlamydia, Legionella and so on.
Viral pneumonia is common in influenza virus, adenovirus, respiratory syncytial virus and so on.
A small number of pneumonia is caused by fungal infections such as Candida, Aspergillus and Cryptococcus.
Only to find out the cause of better treatment, here we introduce a mycoplasma pneumoniae.
Most pneumonia caused by mycoplasma pneumoniae are caused by mycoplasma pneumoniae. Mycoplasma fermentum has been isolated from alveolar lavage fluid of some immunodeficiency patients and patients with respiratory tract infection, and is considered to be a pathogenic pathogen of respiratory tract.
Mycoplasma pneumoniae was first described in the 1960s and had been mistaken for a virus until then.
20% of community acquired pneumonia was caused by Mycoplasma pneumoniae, especially in school-age children, middle-aged and young adults.
In recent years, it has been found that the strain can cause local epidemics in the elderly and children.
Mycoplasma pneumoniae has an incubation period of 2-3 weeks, is commonly transmitted within families, and can remain in the respiratory tract for several months after infection.
The most common clinical manifestation is bronchitis, even acute laryngitis, and about 1/3 of patients will progress to pneumonia;
In addition, it can cause serious extrapulmonary complications in some people, such as meningitis, myelitis and pericarditis.
Mycoplasma pneumoniae could not be clearly observed by conventional light microscopy. Due to the lack of Gram staining on the cell wall, it could not be stained. DNA fluorescence staining and acridine-orange staining were helpful for diagnosis, but did not have specificity.
At present, the rapid detection methods in clinical mainly include serological detection and nucleic acid detection.

Deliberately infecting people with novel coronavirus, UK approves new crown challenge trial

On the 17th of this month, the UK government approved the world’s first novel coronavirus control trial (known as the New Coronavirus Challenge Study), which plans to infect up to 90 volunteers in a rigorous laboratory setting to gain important information about the virus.
Novelty as the research may sound, the concept behind it has a long history, dating back to the late 18th century.
However, the challenge of novel coronavirus is still being debated: is it necessary?
What unique insights does it offer?

Writing | Luo Dinghao

Nearly 90 healthy adults in the UK are about to embark on a journey.
Instead of a normal journey, they will be in London’s Royal Free Hospital, where they will face a novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) and each will be rewarded with around £4,500 (£4,500).
The process is straightforward: The 90 warriors will take on the Novel Coronavirus challenge, putting their health at risk and offering scientists a shortcut to research.

At this very moment, the number of novel coronavirus infections worldwide continues to rise. The total number of infections has so far exceeded 100 million, including more than 27.8 million in the United States.
Vaccination, on the other hand, is not far behind, with more than 180 million people worldwide having received at least one dose of the new crown vaccine as of December 18.

At the same time, many variants of the novel coronavirus are rapidly emerging, thanks to its own characteristics and large infection base.
Last December alone, the world witnessed two high-impact variants (B.1.1.7 in the UK and B.1.351 in South Africa), and many new and potentially influential strains have emerged during the recent winter outbreak.
All this means that the vaccines developed by scientists need to be replaced quickly, which will require more clinical trials.

The UK government approved the world’s first trial of the new crown challenge on 17 January.
In the first phase, up to 90 volunteers will be exposed to the virus in the P3 virus laboratory to determine the minimum dose of the virus that can infect humans.
The aim of this phase is to provide the basis for future research into vaccine and drug challenges.
Once the minimum dose of infection is known, scientists can conduct further tests to confirm the effectiveness of potential vaccines and drugs.

But many people and scholars remain skeptical of the study.
Further discussion of this controversial human trial requires an understanding of the historical and ethical implications behind it.

To infect humans

The “Challenge Study”, to be conducted in the UK, may sound novel, even daunting, but the concepts behind it are old and have made great contributions to human society many times over.

Studies like the Challenge study, collectively known as controlled human infection, or CHI, are designed to expose healthy, low-risk human subjects to the virus in a tightly controlled environment.
Together with candidate vaccines or drugs, CHI tests can provide a great deal of information about the disease itself and treatment options in a short period of time.

The history of the CHI test dates back to the late 1700s, when Britain was plagued by the variola virus.
In the early days of the smallpox epidemic, the most commonly used prevention and control method is “human pox vaccination” : smallpox patients on the pustules broken, and then with a knife will flow out of the pus swab under the skin of the seed.
Since smallpox usually only wreak havoc through the lungs, the virus inoculated under the skin does not actually cause serious damage. Most patients will become immune to smallpox after experiencing mild symptoms.
But it was also important to note that deaths still occurred because the inoculation was still with the real smallpox virus.

ON MAY 14th 1796 Edward Jenner, the “father of vaccines”, carried out his world-famous “vaccination experiment” in Berkeley, a small town in south-west England.
The experiment was inspired by the folklore that a person who had been infected with cowpox could not get smallpox again.
Ms. Jenner inoculated 8-year-old James Phipps under the skin with pus from a cowpox puss belonging to a milkmaid, Sarah Nelmes.
Over the next few days, Phipps experienced a brief, low-grade fever.
Over time, Jenner gave Phipps multiple subcutaneous injections of the smallpox virus, but Phipps showed no signs of illness, and Jenner concluded that Phipps’s vaccinia had successfully protected him against smallpox.
To verify the vaccine’s effectiveness, Jenner gave the same vaccine to 23 other subjects.
The results showed that vaccination did provide immunity against smallpox.
Jenner said this method as “vaccination” (vaccination), etymology is Latin for “vacca”, meaning “cow”.

After Jenner’s “vaccination test,” similar CHI tests followed.
In the 1950s and 1960s, for example, scientists conducted the infamous hepatitis virus research at Willowbrook State School in the United States, exposing School students to the virus without proper consent.
This study successfully revealed the existence of two different hepatitis viruses, A and B, but because of the ethical conflict it caused, researchers had to find a way to standardize the CHI test.

In recent decades, with the development of medical ethics research, CHI tests have gradually become more standardized, and the control and supervision have become more perfect.
In 2018, published in the journal lancet infectious diseases, a reiew from Leiden University (Universiteit Leiden), the University of Tubingen in Germany (Universitt Tubingen) and the University of Liverpool in England (Liverpool University) of five scientists are summarized in the last few decades CHI test, and found that the recent CHI tests have passed strict scientific supervision, most subjects are given explicitly agreed to test,
The number of serious adverse events (SAE) was extremely low.
For example, in several influenza and malaria CHI trials conducted from 1990 to 2014, involving a total of about 6,000 subjects, there were only four cases of SAE.
This shows not only that the treatments or vaccination regimens offered by the CHI trials are effective on their own, but also that the subjects enrolled in these studies were carefully screened out of applicants who might have been harmed by the trials.
Some pathogens infect only humans, making animal models time-consuming, laborious and pointless.
In some CHI trials, with the help of volunteer subjects, scientists have successfully created human models of human pathogens, such as human rhinoviruses, providing critical information for their treatment and prevention.

Roestenberg et al.
The Lancet Infect.
Dis.

All of this evidence suggests that CHI tests are not only increasingly regulated, but also offer unique insights that animal models cannot.

Challenge the new champions

But even amid this optimism, the novel coronavirusCHI trial is proving difficult.
First of all, different from influenza virus and rhinovirus, novel coronavirus is spread in human only for more than 1 year, we have not yet had a clear understanding of its physiological effects, do not know whether the virus can cause long-term, still lasting sequelae after recovery.
Second, some scholars have suggested that CHI testing may no longer provide important insights at a time when the recent mass vaccination campaign has begun to pay off, and the number of new diagnoses in Israel, the United Kingdom, the United States and many European countries is declining.

But the pros argue that there is plenty of evidence that novel coronavirus does little to affect young, healthy adults, and that many people get better quickly after experiencing mild symptoms.
And unlike earlier CHI trials, the New Crown Challenge provides volunteers with a detailed description of the experiment and is only included if the subjects give their consent.
In addition, the recent emergence of novel coronavirus variants has spurred demand for new vaccines that can prevent the infection of mutant strains, and some researchers believe that CHI trials can quickly confirm the effectiveness of these new vaccines, replacing conventional phase III clinical trials.
Nir Eyal, director of the Center for Population Bioethics at Rutgers University, said the new crest trial would require only a few hundred volunteers, making it much faster than a phase III trial with tens of thousands of people.
This means that challenge tests can quickly verify the effectiveness of vaccines and treatments, or dramatically reduce the impact of a mutant strain.

Even so, many scholars are skeptical about the New Crown Challenge experiment.
Matthew Memoli, an immunologist atthe Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases in the United States, said that only a good understanding of Novel coronavirus could properly assess the risk of a challenge trial;
There is not enough information to support plans for a challenge trial.
Other researchers noted that even one death could make it harder to approve future CHI trials for other diseases, even though the risk of death in healthy subjects was extremely low if the challenge trial was carried out rushly.
As a result, some people believe that the audit and supervision authorities need to think twice before carrying out the new crown challenge trial.

In the world’s first trial of the new crown challenge, approved by the UK government, researchers will try to reduce the discomfort of their subjects.
Once the subjects became infected, they were given treatment drugs such as Remdesivir and Regn-CoV2, which quickly alleviated symptoms and kept the subjects healthy.
The goal of this stage is to determine the minimum dose of virus required for infection.
After that, scientists will conduct further tests to confirm the effectiveness of potential vaccines and drugs.

It’s important to note that this is a preliminary study, using a strain called Novel Coronavirus that was popular in Europe last summer, not a recent variant.
But the success of this preliminary study could pave the way for new crown challenges to be tested against mutant strains.
As Christopher Chiu, the leader of the preliminary study, put it, the researchers are also “considering which new crown variant to test next.”
However, this pilot study alone could provide us with the question “What is the lowest dose of virus necessary to cause infection?”
“How exactly does the immune system behave in the early stages of infection?”
“And” What’s the difference between symptomatic and asymptomatic patients?”
And so on.

Note:

In fact, Edward Jenner’s title as the “father of vaccines” has long been controversial.
John Fewster realized in 1768 that vaccinia infection made people immune to the smallpox virus, and for more than a decade researchers from Britain and continental Europe investigated the possibility of using vaccinia as a smallpox vaccine.
This article describes it in detail.

[Note 2] Knowledge of hepatitis viruses has improved greatly since then, and five major hepatitis viruses (hepatitis A, hepatitis B, hepatitis C, hepatitis D and hepatitis E viruses) have been classified.

[Note 3] This is controversial. Most of the scholars who support the CHI trial are conservative and support that the CHI trial should be viewed as a supplement to, rather than a complete replacement for, phase III trials.

A new variant novel coronavirus has been found in Japan, with more than 90 cases reported

Japan’s National Institute of Infectious Diseases said Monday that a novel coronavirus strain has been found in the country, which is different from those previously found in the UK, South Africa and other countries.
The mutated virus may weaken the immune response, but it is not more infectious.
According to data released by Japan’s National Institute of Infectious Diseases, as of early February, 91 cases of the mutant novel coronavirus infection have been detected in the Kanto region, including two cases detected in airport tests.

The new coronavirus in the United Kingdom and the United States have merged, and this can be done

  Humans shouldn’t really be finished. . . According to the test of a new coronavirus patient by scientists, they found that the new crown virus Kent B117 from the United Kingdom actually merged with the California variant B1429 from the United States, resulting in a new type of new crown virus. This virus will have stronger transmission and penetration, and is likely to cause some current vaccines to be ineffective.

  It is relatively rare to have a combination of viruses. It is still unclear whether the two viruses are synthesized in the patient’s body (in this case, thank goodness, as long as this patient is done), or the combination has been completed and the infection was transmitted to this patient.

  At present, the number of vaccination in the UK has exceeded 15 million, entering a new stage. If this syncytial virus spreads on a large scale in the UK, it is likely to cause previous vaccination efforts to fall short.

  For everyone in the UK, you must be very concerned about when life will return to normal. According to the current situation of the epidemic situation, by mid-April, the number of infections may drop below 1,000. At the same time, due to large-scale herd immunity and universal vaccination, it is likely that the mortality rate will be reduced to zero by then.

  Isn’t it surprising that after a year, Britain is really about to achieve herd immunity? It turned out that the Prime Minister was serious when he started joking. Finally, let’s talk about how you got fat during this time?

The United States has rejected the WHO’s assertion, insisting that the virus came from Wuhan

The U.S. government is reviewing a World Health Organization report released Tuesday, according to a February 9 fact sheet on the White House website.
The world health organization expert group arrived in China last month, is China’s wuhan COVID – 19 source investigation, after the world health organization (who) after visiting survey to determine COVID – 19 viruses could not have come from the so-called lab, however, the White House is now going to reassess the conclusion by the world health organization, is the White House isn’t going to admit that the world health organization expert group, the results.

The US insists that the Covid-19 virus came from Wuhan

Earlier, the US State Department spokesperson said that no reasonable person would believe that the Covid-19 virus came from anywhere else, which means that the US has determined that the Covid-19 virus came from Wuhan, China, and is determined to hack China.

When the Covid-19 virus appeared, the United States had repeatedly said that the Covid-19 virus was the Chinese virus Wuhan virus, claiming that the Covid-19 virus originated from China and claiming compensation from China. Such unrealistic accusations by the United States would only become an international laughing stock.
After Biden took office, he quickly asked the United States not to allow the use of the Wuhan virus, China virus, but still some anti-China politicians turned a blind eye to it.

World Health Organization clears China

On the afternoon of February 9th, the World Health Organization (WHO) and Chinese experts on the investigation of the source of Covid-19 virus officially held a press conference in Wuhan.
The World Health Organization notes that the Covid-19 virus can be transmitted directly from animals to humans or by intermediate hosts.
The food chain is also a route of transmission, and frozen foods in particular provide a suitable environment for transmission, but at the moment, the possibility of laboratory leakage is basically zero.

After the WHO expert team came to Wuhan, China, they went to the South China Seafood Market, Wuhan Institute of Virology and other places for investigation, and found no conclusive evidence to prove that the initial location of Covid-19 virus was in the South China seafood market.
Russian experts say the Chinese laboratory is so well equipped that it is hard to believe that Covid-19 could have leaked from there.

A clown is doomed to failure in the end

The World Health Organization (WHO) sent a panel of experts from several countries to produce an authoritative report.
The United States has repeatedly claimed that the Covid-19 virus originated in Wuhan, China. Now the WHO panel has conclusively concluded that at this stage, the United States has admitted that the WHO report is nothing more than a slap in the face. It is not possible for the United States to do this.

When the Covid-19 epidemic broke out, the United States turned to China many times to divert the pressure of the epidemic, but this approach did little to help the United States fight against the Covid-19 epidemic, and ultimately only made more Americans die to pay for the government’s inaction.

South China seafood market, virus research institute is not the source of the virus!

WHO: The virus was most likely transmitted to humans through animals as intermediate hosts. There is no evidence that the virus escaped from the Wuhan laboratory…

It has been more than half a year since the outbreak of Niangang on a global scale. From 2020 to 2021, the shadow of Niangang has been hanging over the whole world…

The first outbreak of the epidemic in Wuhan, China, once boarded the center of the storm, a variety of rumors one after another!
Wuhan, a heroic city, has not only borne the great trauma brought by novel coronavirus, but also been constantly framed by foreign media.

In May 2020, the WHO made a decision to investigate the source of the virus, and the mission was conducted in October.
In January 2021, 17 experts from China and other 10 countries and 17 experts from the United Nations organization composed of novel coronavirus traceability group finally entered Wuhan……

For the past two weeks, the 34-member team of experts has made field visits to fresh markets, health departments and virus laboratories in and around Wuhan.

Now, the World Health Organization has finally “washed” the charges of Wuhan!!

Yesterday (Feb. 9, 2021) afternoon, Novel Coronavirus trace press conference held in Wuhan, the World Health Organization experts said there is no evidence that the virus was leaked from the Wuhan laboratory, and there is no evidence that the South China seafood market is the source of the virus.
Novel coronavirus probably passed from animal to human by host.
Experts no longer pursue laboratory hypotheses.
Experts also stressed that the origin of the new crown has only just begun…

The virus is most likely

It is transmitted to humans through animals as intermediate hosts

Speaking at a press conference in Wuhan, Dr Ben Embarek, head of the WHO’s Novel Coronavirus Traceability Group, said the investigation did not gain new insights, but deepened what was already known.
During a four-week investigation in China, the WHO panel failed to clarify how the novel coronavirus had spread to people.

While there are four hypotheses for the origin of novel coronavirus, Embarrek said the most likely is that it passed to humans through animals as intermediate hosts.
Three other hypotheses about the origin of the new coronavirus are: a specific animal is transmitted directly to humans, with no intermediate host;
Through frozen food;
Laboratory related incidents.

However, the team was unable to identify the animal as the intermediate host.
Experts say it is only a preliminary understanding and more research is needed.
Experts say the evidence suggests the virus may have come from a natural host.
“But Wuhan is not a large bat concentration, so the initial outbreak in Wuhan is unlikely to be bat-to-human. It could have been transmitted by other animals.”
More research should be done on bat samples, as well as on other potential host animals.

As for frozen foods, Ben Embarek said, “We know that viruses can survive freezing, but we don’t really know if they can be transmitted to people, under what circumstances and how they might happen.”

There’s no evidence that

The southern Chinese market is the source of the virus

According to experts, a certain scale of infection occurred among people in Wuhan in December 2019, and many of the early cases were linked to the South China seafood market, which can only prove that the market is one of the transmission points of the virus.
According to the current information, it is impossible to determine how the novel coronavirus was introduced into the South China seafood market.

Experts also said the initial infections were partly linked to seafood markets in southern China, partly to other markets and partly not to any market at all.

The virus can’t

It was leaked from the lab

As for rumors that the virus was leaked from the Wuhan lab, Ben Embarek said, “While accidents do happen…
But no laboratory anywhere in the world has published or conducted research using this virus or its close relatives “, so it is “very difficult to explain the introduction of the virus into human populations” using this hypothesis and further research is not recommended.
“It is very unlikely that anything will leak from there,” he said, citing the safety regulations of the Wuhan Virus Laboratory.

In an interview after a field visit to the Wuhan Institute of Virology, Ben Embarek said, “The person you suspect is actually running a well-controlled lab and everything is in good order.
We saw everything, we heard everything.
It’s hard to imagine anything leaking out of there.”

In an interview, he clarified that “there is no basis for Western claims of laboratory leaks”.

Novel coronavirus tracing the origin just began, the conclusion that the world health organization and Chinese joint investigation group announce newest, let carry on the back a year the Wuhan of disgrace, finally “wash” his accusation!

Of course, the origin of novel coronavirus is important, but now for the global people, to be able to get herd immunity as soon as possible through the vaccine, to restore the normal life before the epidemic is the most important thing!

There are 38 billion billion viruses living in your body

Social isolation has stopped the outbreak, but many people are still getting sick from other viruses.
As scientists are discovering, many viruses are lurking quietly in the human body, hiding in the lungs, blood and nervous system, or living in a host of gut microbes.
Some thrive in the body, while others attack the body’s cells, tissues and organs.
Biologists estimate that there are 38 trillion viruses living in each human body, 10 times as many as bacteria.
Some viruses can cause disease, but many just coexist with humans.
In late 2019, for example, researchers at the University of Pennsylvania discovered a new class of Redondoviridae virus in the respiratory tract. It contains 19 viral strains, a few of which have been linked to periodontal or lung disease, but others may help fight respiratory diseases.
A steady stream of new research clearly shows that we’re not just made up of human cells;
Instead, our body is more like a superorganism, made up of human cells and symbiotic bacteria, fungi and, most abundantly, viruses.
The latest data suggest that up to half of the biological matter in the human body is not produced by human cells.
A decade ago, researchers were barely aware of the large number of viruses in the human body.
Today, however, we think of large viral groups as part of a much larger human microbiome.
This microbiome is made up of a large number of passive and active invading microbes that occupy almost every corner of the human body.
We’ve been mapping the virus community for 10 years now, and the more we look at it, the more we see that viruses are like our partners, and that they can have a positive or negative impact on our daily lives.
Recent research suggests that we can even use viruses to improve our own health.
For example, researchers at Rockefeller University in the United States have purified an enzyme from a virus that kills methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus bacteria in patients.
The results were so encouraging that the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has designated the enzyme as a “breakthrough therapy”.
The treatment is currently in phase 3 clinical trials.
An abundance of viruses
Viruses need to invade host cells to reproduce, and they are adept at taking advantage of all the options offered by the body.
Around 2013, scientists found the virus in the skin, respiratory tract, blood and urine.
But I, Chandrabali Ghose and others found the virus in an even more surprising place — in a September 2019 paper, we detected it in the cerebrospinal fluid of healthy adults.
These viruses belong to several different families and are not associated with any known disease.
We also found the same virus in plasma, joint fluid and breast milk.
Scientists know that some rare infectious viruses (herpes virus in particular) can sneak into the cerebrospinal fluid.
The central nervous system, which is usually thought of as a sterile environment, is somehow overrun by multiple viral populations.
What is a virus?
A virus is an extremely tiny particle made up of a protein shell and its inner strand of RNA, or DNA.
They can only replicate with the help of host cells.
Viruses can be identified in three ways: shape (A), host (B), and genetic material (C).
Viruses seem to accumulate in our bodies as soon as we are born.
Studies have shown that a variety of viruses are present in the intestines of babies shortly after birth, suggesting that the viruses may have come from the baby’s mother, and that some of them enter the baby’s body through breast milk.
As babies grow into weeks or months, the number of some of these viruses declines.
Other viruses, from the air, water, food and other people, get into their bodies.
The virus grows in number and diversity and persists in the body for years by infecting cells.
The virus is relatively stable in adults compared to babies.
As we age, the Anelloviridae family (200 species) is present in almost everyone’s body, just as bacteria are in our bodies.
Many of the viruses that live in our bodies do not attack human cells.
Instead, they attack some bacteria in the human microbiome.
These viruses, called bacteriophages, lurk inside bacteria, using their organelles to replicate themselves and often burst out of them to infect more bacteria, killing the host bacteria in the process.
Bacteriophages are almost everywhere in nature.
If you look closely, they can be found in soil, in any water environment from the ocean to your home faucet, and in extreme environments such as acidic minerals, the Arctic and hot springs.
You can even spot viruses floating around in the air.
They are there to look for the bacteria that live in them.
For phages, the human body is just another hunting ground, and infecting and attacking the bacteria in it is their purpose.
In 2017, Sophie Nguyen and Jeremy Barr, then working at San Diego State University, demonstrated that many phages can penetrate the mucous membranes on the surface of some organs to enter the body and find their final site of settlement.
Several laboratory studies have shown that phages can penetrate the mucous membranes of the human gut, lungs, liver, kidneys and even the brain.
But once phages randomly enter places where few bacteria exist, such as the central nervous system, they may fail to replicate and eventually die out.
The group of viruses in the human body
Different parts of the body have very different groups of viruses.
Melissa Ly of the University of California, San Diego, and I have also shown that by comparing the viral groups of unrelated people, it is possible to determine whether any of them are living together.
Different people can have very different viral groups, and cohabiting people seem to share about 25 percent of their viral groups.
The virus can spread not only among family members through typical transmission methods such as coughing, but also through daily contact, sharing of sinks, toilets, tables and food.
Although we only looked at a small number of people, the data shows that roommates who are not in a relationship share the same percentage of viruses as roommates who are in a romantic relationship.
Intimate contact doesn’t seem to have much effect on this, just living in the same space is enough.
Shira Abeles of the University of California, San Diego, has found huge differences in the virus in the mouths of men and women, which may be caused by different hormonal components in their bodies, but no one has been able to prove a link.
We did find that there was a lot of variation in the group of viruses among different populations because of geographical location.
For example, populations in Western countries tend to be less diverse than those in other countries, and these differences may be related to diet and the environment.
While many viruses in the human body infect bacteria, a small number also infect cells directly in human tissues.
These viruses may be in a minority, as the body’s immune system suppresses them.
Iwijn De Vlaminck, then at Stanford University, showed that certain types of viruses rise sharply when a person’s immune system is challenged — for example, when the recipient of an organ has to take immunosuppressive drugs to avoid organ rejection.
The observations show that under normal circumstances, our immune system can suppress the virus, but when people’s immune system is suppressed, the virus can multiply unchecked.
We can also see this opportunism in Novel Coronavirus.
Patients infected with novel coronavirus, especially those with severe illness, are likely to develop complications.
The most common is secondary bacterial pneumonia, or bacteremia, which is caused by an increase in bacteria in the blood.
Viruses that lurk in humans, such as human Epstein-Barr virus and Cytomegalovirus, can be reactivated.
When the immune system is focused on fighting novel coronavirus, patients may be more vulnerable to other viruses.
Although many phages are predators, they probably live in harmony with their host bacteria and don’t explode inside them.
When some phages infect bacteria, they integrate their genomes into the bacteria’s genome.
While some phages multiply immediately, killing the host bacteria, others simply persist in the body, as if in a quiet, dormant state.
This may be a survival strategy: when the host bacterium divides, it needs to make a copy of its own genome, as well as a copy of the phage’s genome.
In this mode, the survival of the host determines the survival of the phage, so the phage has some benefit in keeping the host alive.
It’s clear why this strategy is good for phages, but it’s not clear that it’s good for bacteria.
For whatever reason, many bacteria in the human body seem to have adapted to living with parasitic bacteriophages.

Some viruses are less well understood, some may be harmless, and they are in almost everyone’s body, such as Crassphage.
When the time is right, these dormant phages wake up and produce lots of progeny, killing their host cells.
Sometimes, some phages leave the bacteria with the bacteria’s genes, which can sometimes benefit them when they infect the next bacterium.
For example, I discovered that phages in saliva carry genes that help bacteria evade the body’s immune system.
Some phages even carry genes that help the bacteria resist some antibiotics.
Phages don’t need such genes themselves, since antibiotics can’t kill them, but when they give the genes to the host bacteria, they help the bacteria survive — and the phages survive.
We often see similar gene transfer phenomena, such as horizontal transfer of drug-resistant genes from one bacterium to another.
Phages can also further protect their hosts.
As a pathogenic bacterium, Pseudomonas aeruginosa usually causes pneumonia and leads to a variety of diseases.
People with lung diseases like cystic fibrosis can’t completely clear their lungs of bacteria, even when given antibiotics that kill the bacteria.
Some Pseudomonas aeruginosa incorporate filamentous phages into their genomes.
In 2019, a team led by Elizabeth Burgener, Paul Bollyky and others at Stanford University found that filamentous phages can help Pseudomonas aeruginosa hide from antibiotics by forming a protective outer layer of carbohydrates and proteins on the outside of cells.
This allows them to hide in place until the antibiotic has been completely metabolized in the body, then continue to multiply and cause infection.
Beneficial virus
Trying to use viruses that live in the human body to improve health is not itself a very new idea.
We found that something similar is already happening naturally, as phages move around the human body looking for suitable bacteria to host, some of them attach to the mucosal surfaces of cells in the nose, throat, stomach and intestines.
Although phages cannot replicate in these cells, they can lie in wait for an intrusive host to pass by.
In theory, this process could protect us from certain diseases.
Suppose you eat food contaminated with salmonella. As the bacteria pass through the stomach, phages on the surface of the stomach membrane infect the bacteria and kill them before they can cause disease.
In this way, phages can actually act as part of the immune system, helping us fight off some of the bacteria that are harmful to us.
No one has confirmed this yet, but in 2019 a Finnish research team showed that phages that stick to the mucus of pigs and rainbow trout can live for seven days, during which time they help the animals fend off a class of bacteria that infects them.
The human virus group Our bodies are full of viruses that come and go and stay in our bodies for years.
Some families of viruses, such as the herpesviridae family, cause a variety of diseases.
One phage that is getting a lot of attention is crAssphage, which was discovered in 2014 by Bas Dutih of the Radboude Institute in the Netherlands.
Since then, research has shown that these phages inhabit the vast majority of the world’s human population, in addition to traditional hunter-gatherers.
It is very rare for a virus to spread so widely, and no one has yet found a link to a disease.
Scientists think it can control the spread of a common intestinal bacterium called Bacteroides.
Some physicians have expressed interest in the potential for phages to resist a proliferation of drug-resistant bacteria.
Phages were discovered more than a hundred years ago, when doctors tried to use them to treat pathogenic bacteria, but without great success.
Antibiotics replaced phage therapy in most parts of the world in the 1940s because they were more effective and easier to use.
Now, some medical researchers are doing new work on phages, such as researchers at Rockefeller University who are using a phage enzyme to fight methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) infections.
For years, many doctors were afraid to use bacteriophages because they didn’t know whether the human immune system could overreact to them, leading to life-threatening inflammation.
Bacteriophages used for therapy need to be grown with bacteria, which can cause a strong immune response in humans if they are not completely removed before phage therapy is used.
Today, we have more advanced phage purification methods that have largely alleviated concerns about adverse reactions.
What really limits phage therapy for infectious diseases is the difficulty of finding an effective virus.
For years, researchers have been scouring the natural habitats of phages, trying to find ones that can fight pathogens that cause humans.
Viruses are known to be abundant in feces, saliva, and sputum, and some researchers are aware that local sewage treatment plants may also be one of the most abundant sources of phages.
A few similar phages have been used in experimental treatments.
In 2016, Robert Schooley of the University of California, San Diego, oversaw a landmark case.
In this case, doctors successfully treated the school’s professor, Tom Patterson, who had suffered multiple organ failure after being infected with Acinetobacter baumannii, using phages from sewage and environmental sources.
Viruses improve human health
As we learn more about the role played by the various viruses in the human virogroup, it may be possible to develop more treatments.
Although it will take us a long time to figure out what the human virus group is, it is necessary when you consider what has been achieved in the last decade.
A decade ago, many scientists thought the microbiome was just a collection of tiny organisms passively distributed in the gut.
But we now know that while some parts of the microbiome are indeed stable, others are active and constantly changing.
And the part that seems to be most active right now is the virus.
In 2018, a study of donated brain tissue from people who died of Alzheimer’s disease showed high levels of the herpes virus in their brains.
Then, in May 2020, the Tufts and M.I.T. researchers infected the brain-like tissue they had developed in the lab with Herpes simplex virus 1, which became filled with amyloid plaques, similar to the brain-destroying structures found in the brains of Alzheimer’s patients.
We were surprised to learn that some familiar viruses could play an unexpected and crucial role.
As research continues, we may discover new strains of viruses that affect human health and develop new ways of using viruses to manipulate the microbiome and protect people from disease.
If humans can figure out how to manage bad viruses and use good ones, we might be able to transform ourselves into more powerful superorganisms.
David Pride is an infectious disease specialist and associate professor of pathology at the University of California, San Diego.
His laboratory focuses on the role of the microbial community in human homeostasis, health and disease.