 Cats Can Get SARS
|
Oct. 30, 2003 — Domestic cats, not just wild animals, can be infected by the SARS virus, although there is no evidence that these pets pose any significant threat to human health, scientists reported on Thursday.
In a study published in the British weekly journal Nature, they said that a group of cats and ferrets, given a large dose of the virus in laboratory conditions, went on to develop symptoms of the disease and also infected other animals.
The research involved six cats and six ferrets, which were given a dose of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) virus that had been taken from a Hong Kong patient who had died of the pneumonia-like disorder.
|
 
|
|||||||
Mucal swabs and an autopsy, conducted on eight out of the 12 animals four days after infection, found traces of the virus in the throat and lungs, as well as typical pulmonary lesions inflicted by SARS.
The other four animals were checked after 28 days and all were found to have antibodies, the immune system's telltale of infection.
Two healthy cats and two ferrets were placed with the infected animals and they in turn caught the virus. Both ferrets died, although the cats did not show signs of sickness.
"Our results show that ferrets and domestic cats are susceptible to experimental infection by SCV (SARS coronavirus), and that the virus is efficiently transmitted to animals living with them," the authors said.
Lead researcher Albert Osterhaus, a virologist at the Erasmus Medical Center in Rotterdam, said the point of the research was to see whether cats could be used, like monkeys, as a lab model to test for SARS.
Previous research has already indicated that Chinese ferret badgers, masked palm civets and raccoon dogs — wild animals that are commonly eaten in parts of the southern China — can be infected by SARS.
One theory is that these animals are a natural reservoir for the virus, and that the agent leapt from them to humans who were in close contact, thus unleashing the global SARS epidemic nearly a year ago.
But some experts say that the transmission path could in fact go the other way: that humans infected those animals that have tested positive for SARS.
Asked by AFP whether cats could spread the disease — that they could catch SARS, and then spread it to their owners by sneezing or leaving mucus on surfaces — Osterhaus said he did not believe that this was the case.
"Although some cats have been infected during the outbreak in Hong Kong, I don't think they are really a vector for spreading the virus.
"The only thing we have seen is that cats are susceptible (to infection by the SARS virus) in experimental conditions," he added. "Under practical circumstances, they will not be infected easily.
"In the odd circumstances that they might be infected, they can spread the virus for a very short period of time, but in that situation, humans are very much more dangerous to themselves than cats are, in sneezing or leaving the virus on utensils which are picked up by others."
< news main
