Tiger at US zoo tests positive for coronavirus | Hacker News Reader

Tiger at US zoo tests positive for coronavirus

bbc.co.uk

85 pointsOrgNet32 comments

For context, the evidence-based consensus as of now is that felines (including pet cats) can catch covid-19 from humans and then transmit it to other cats and maybe other humans, but they are not as susceptible to catching it as humans are. It takes a massive initial viral load for your cat to catch it from you and it will develop only a mild expression of the coronavirus. Dogs do not seem to catch it, but that doesn’t mean they haven’t tested positive due to second-hand exposure/contamination (from licking their human friends).

Note that the original SARS was likely transmitted to humans from its original hosts via a feline intermediary, so scientists were not at all surprised by these findings as the similarities between the two SARS are very high.

So it’s not a big surprise that tigers can catch it too.

To be clear, there is no good data on either of those assertions.

The important takeaway here is that this Coronavirus, and likely others, will have persistent animal reservoirs that make humans endemically exposed to it.

...which means that even after a vaccination campaign, the virus will still be endemic to the population. ie. It's not going away.

...what more worrying is that Coronaviruses have a tendency of re-infecting patients and have dwindling immune response in people (source=TWIV podcast from April 3rd). ...which worryingly means that we may need regular vaccinations against covid-19 forever.

> To be clear, there is no good data on either of those assertions.

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-00984-8

Can you share data on reinfection? I have not been able to find enough evidence to rule out testing error being mistaken for reinfection.

however, evolution theory is on our side. With the virus going through mutations it will end being less deadly as time goes on )as a general rule=. It makes sense: Deadlier versions of the virus die away when they kill their host. Healthy mutations infect more people.

Coronaviruses with error correction in their RNA replication mechanisms, like covid-19, do not mutate very much.

This is different from Influenza which easily shifts its RNA sequence and this requires new yearly vaccinations / and avoids immunity in humans.

So then that means that likely immunization duration will be long and vaccine cycle less dense? That's positive isn't it?

A small German study has found[1] no transmissible viruses on cats in households with multiple COVID-19 infected people. So while maybe possible, it seems rare.

[1] https://www.zuercher-presse.com/virologe-hendrick-streeck-gi...

This was my source: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-00984-8

For someone who understand how viruses target hosts, if a tiger can contract cvoid-19, does this mean house cats can as well?

Yes. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/01/cats-can-infec...

https://www.cnn.com/2020/03/15/asia/coronavirus-animals-pets...

Yes

https://nypost.com/2020/04/03/cats-can-infect-each-other-wit...

https://tass.com/world/1139957

Yes, and the list of mammals that have the ACE2 receptor that the virus uses to enter cells is LONG, and includes both dogs and cats.

"Nadia, her sister Azul, as well as two Amur tigers and three African lions, had developed a dry cough and all are expected to fully recover, it says. "

How do they know the prognosis?

I hope they physically distance these big cats from their keepers.

The nature of the cough and its progression tells you a lot, especially if you can tell respiratory symptoms have peaked. That said, acute respiratory distress is the primary means by which people are dying of this disease; you can easily test for the presence of severe symptoms if “patient is able to breathe unassisted” is insufficient for some reason. The lower respiratory issues can be seen quite easily on a simple x-ray.

In all cases, it’s been documented to have very mild manifestations in felines in laboratory autopsies of infected and euthanized housecats and that is probably a factor in their confidence.

When the first Cow or Chicken gets it - then I'm going to freak out.

"Tiger" and "coronavirus" are both buzzwords right now (new Tiger television show promotion). BBC click farming is understandable now that citizens are expected to be parsing their RSS feeds more often than usual (mandatory quarantine idling worker minds).

This is unfortunate because I expected these recently inflicted conditions to prompt temporarily mothballed bodies and minds to pursue interests outside of the digital realm.

Tigers' body temperatures are naturally slightly hotter. Maybe this means they can endure higher fevers and thus fight off the virus a little more easily-- from what I recall reading, corona-viruses from bats often are resistant to lower fevers because they've developed in bats, which are also slightly higher in body temperature, especially in flight.

It's interesting that tigers have access to the test.

If a tiger walks into your clinic and asks for a test, you give it to her.

Even the relaxed fda standards/protocols are leaving a lot of potential capability unused/unusable, even for non-patient-related medical research. Vets don't have as many hurdles, even for something as simple as running a PCR.

Edit: There's an interesting story on what the LSU vet school lab had to go through, as they setup to run coronavirus testing for the state. I'm not aware of an article that covers all the technical/admin hurdles, but they were significant.

When a bunch of Tigers show covid19 symptoms, testing wasn’t for their sake. It was to see if they could get infected which would make them carriers for the virus.

:thinking_face: I should get my gerbil tested.

> It's interesting that tigers have access to the test.

It's a misconception that there is just one test. There are numerous tests available, some of which are from private companies still awaiting official approval to test humans in the United States.

Testing capacity has also caught up demand in most (though not all) locations, as shown by the testing rate leveling off. This isn't like the early days where tests were so scarce that they were being rationed, although many logistical bottlenecks still remain.

Some institutions are now opting not to test people unless it would alter the response or treatment plan in some way.

Actually, the testing rate is leveling off because we have ran out of the necessary supplies to increase it, not because we have satisfied demand. It is still being rationed everywhere in the US.

>Some institutions are now opting not to test people unless it would alter the response or treatment plan in some way.

Everyone that I've spoken to (on the front lines) has said that this is what's been the hospital standard since day 1, regardless of what official protocols say. Not because of testing capacity, but because of the additional ppe wasted that's required to administer a test.

Unless you've got low O2 levels and will imminently need breathing assistance, you're getting sent home without a test and orders to self quarantine.

I guess we now have enough tests for humans if we have them for tigers.

Tigers are more expensive.

Haven’t you watched Tiger King? Turns out tigers are very cheap to acquire and to the tune of $10000 a year to maintain.

Did Joe Exotic have a conjugal visit?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com