鼠疫流行病学:在鼠疫研究中使用数学流行病学模型的问题以及人类跳蚤和虱子的传播问题。

Ole J Benedictow
{"title":"鼠疫流行病学:在鼠疫研究中使用数学流行病学模型的问题以及人类跳蚤和虱子的传播问题。","authors":"Ole J Benedictow","doi":"10.1155/2019/1542024","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This article addresses the recent use of mathematical epidemiological SIR or SEIR models in plague research. This use of S(E)IR models is highly problematic, but the problems are not presented and considered. Serious problems show in that such models are used to \"prove\" that historical plague was a (1) Filoviridae disease and (2) a bacterial disease caused by <i>Yersinia pestis</i> which was transmitted by human fleas and lice. (3) They also support early-phase transmission (by fleas). They purportedly consistently disprove (4) the conventional view that plague is/was a rat-and-rat-flea-borne disease. For these reasons, the focus is on methodological problems and on empirical testing by modern medical, entomological, and historical epidemiological data. An important or predominant vectorial role in plague epidemics for human fleas and lice requires that several necessary conditions are satisfied, which are generally not considered by advocates of the human ectoparasite hypothesis of plague transmission: (1) the prevalence and levels of human plague bacteraemia (human plague cases as sources of infection of feeding human ectoparasites); (2) the general size of blood meals ingested by human fleas and lice; (3) the consequent number of ingested plague bacteria; (4) the lethal dose of bacteria for 50% of a normal sample of infected human beings, LD<sub>50</sub>; and (5) efficient mechanism of transmission by lice and by fleas. The factual answers to these crucial questions can be ascertained and shown to invalidate the human ectoparasite hypothesis. The view of the standard works on plague has been corroborated, that bubonic plague, historical and modern, is/was a rat-and-rat-flea-borne disease caused by <i>Yersinia pestis</i>. These conclusions are concordant with and corroborate recent studies which, by laboratory experiments, invalidated the early-transmission hypothesis as a mechanism of transmission of LDs to humans in plague epidemics and removed this solution to the problem of transmission by human fleas.</p>","PeriodicalId":22481,"journal":{"name":"The Canadian Journal of Infectious Diseases & Medical Microbiology = Journal Canadien des Maladies Infectieuses et de la Microbiologie Médicale","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-08-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6720821/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Epidemiology of Plague: Problems with the Use of Mathematical Epidemiological Models in Plague Research and the Question of Transmission by Human Fleas and Lice.\",\"authors\":\"Ole J Benedictow\",\"doi\":\"10.1155/2019/1542024\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>This article addresses the recent use of mathematical epidemiological SIR or SEIR models in plague research. This use of S(E)IR models is highly problematic, but the problems are not presented and considered. Serious problems show in that such models are used to \\\"prove\\\" that historical plague was a (1) Filoviridae disease and (2) a bacterial disease caused by <i>Yersinia pestis</i> which was transmitted by human fleas and lice. (3) They also support early-phase transmission (by fleas). They purportedly consistently disprove (4) the conventional view that plague is/was a rat-and-rat-flea-borne disease. For these reasons, the focus is on methodological problems and on empirical testing by modern medical, entomological, and historical epidemiological data. An important or predominant vectorial role in plague epidemics for human fleas and lice requires that several necessary conditions are satisfied, which are generally not considered by advocates of the human ectoparasite hypothesis of plague transmission: (1) the prevalence and levels of human plague bacteraemia (human plague cases as sources of infection of feeding human ectoparasites); (2) the general size of blood meals ingested by human fleas and lice; (3) the consequent number of ingested plague bacteria; (4) the lethal dose of bacteria for 50% of a normal sample of infected human beings, LD<sub>50</sub>; and (5) efficient mechanism of transmission by lice and by fleas. The factual answers to these crucial questions can be ascertained and shown to invalidate the human ectoparasite hypothesis. The view of the standard works on plague has been corroborated, that bubonic plague, historical and modern, is/was a rat-and-rat-flea-borne disease caused by <i>Yersinia pestis</i>. These conclusions are concordant with and corroborate recent studies which, by laboratory experiments, invalidated the early-transmission hypothesis as a mechanism of transmission of LDs to humans in plague epidemics and removed this solution to the problem of transmission by human fleas.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":22481,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Canadian Journal of Infectious Diseases & Medical Microbiology = Journal Canadien des Maladies Infectieuses et de la Microbiologie Médicale\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-08-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6720821/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Canadian Journal of Infectious Diseases & Medical Microbiology = Journal Canadien des Maladies Infectieuses et de la Microbiologie Médicale\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/1542024\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2019/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Canadian Journal of Infectious Diseases & Medical Microbiology = Journal Canadien des Maladies Infectieuses et de la Microbiologie Médicale","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/1542024","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2019/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文讨论了最近在鼠疫研究中使用数学流行病学 SIR 或 SEIR 模型的情况。S(E)IR 模型的使用存在很大问题,但这些问题并未被提出和考虑。严重的问题表现在,这些模型被用来 "证明 "历史上的鼠疫是一种 (1) Filoviridae 疾病和 (2) 由鼠疫耶尔森菌引起的细菌性疾病,由人类跳蚤和虱子传播。(3) 他们还支持早期传播(通过跳蚤)。(4) 据称,它们一致推翻了鼠疫是/曾经是一种鼠蚤传播疾病的传统观点。由于这些原因,本文的重点在于方法论问题以及现代医学、昆虫学和历史流行病学数据的实证检验。人类跳蚤和虱子在鼠疫流行中扮演重要或主要的媒介角色需要满足几个必要条件,而鼠疫传播的人类体外寄生虫假说的倡导者通常不考虑这些条件:(1) 人类鼠疫菌血症的流行率和水平(人类鼠疫病例作为摄食人类外寄生虫的传染源);(2) 人类跳蚤和虱子摄取的血餐的一般大小;(3) 因此摄取的鼠疫细菌数量;(4) 50%正常感染人类样本的细菌致死剂量,即 LD50;(5) 虱子和跳蚤的有效传播机制。这些关键问题的事实答案可以确定,并证明人类外寄生虫假说是无效的。鼠疫标准著作的观点已经得到证实,即鼠疫,无论是历史上的还是现代的鼠疫,都是由鼠疫耶尔森菌引起的一种鼠蚤传播疾病。这些结论与最近的研究相一致并得到了证实,最近的研究通过实验室实验,宣布早期传播假说作为鼠疫流行病中LD传播给人类的机制无效,并取消了这一通过人类跳蚤传播问题的解决方案。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Epidemiology of Plague: Problems with the Use of Mathematical Epidemiological Models in Plague Research and the Question of Transmission by Human Fleas and Lice.

This article addresses the recent use of mathematical epidemiological SIR or SEIR models in plague research. This use of S(E)IR models is highly problematic, but the problems are not presented and considered. Serious problems show in that such models are used to "prove" that historical plague was a (1) Filoviridae disease and (2) a bacterial disease caused by Yersinia pestis which was transmitted by human fleas and lice. (3) They also support early-phase transmission (by fleas). They purportedly consistently disprove (4) the conventional view that plague is/was a rat-and-rat-flea-borne disease. For these reasons, the focus is on methodological problems and on empirical testing by modern medical, entomological, and historical epidemiological data. An important or predominant vectorial role in plague epidemics for human fleas and lice requires that several necessary conditions are satisfied, which are generally not considered by advocates of the human ectoparasite hypothesis of plague transmission: (1) the prevalence and levels of human plague bacteraemia (human plague cases as sources of infection of feeding human ectoparasites); (2) the general size of blood meals ingested by human fleas and lice; (3) the consequent number of ingested plague bacteria; (4) the lethal dose of bacteria for 50% of a normal sample of infected human beings, LD50; and (5) efficient mechanism of transmission by lice and by fleas. The factual answers to these crucial questions can be ascertained and shown to invalidate the human ectoparasite hypothesis. The view of the standard works on plague has been corroborated, that bubonic plague, historical and modern, is/was a rat-and-rat-flea-borne disease caused by Yersinia pestis. These conclusions are concordant with and corroborate recent studies which, by laboratory experiments, invalidated the early-transmission hypothesis as a mechanism of transmission of LDs to humans in plague epidemics and removed this solution to the problem of transmission by human fleas.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Circulating Dynamics of SARS-CoV-2 Variants between April 2021 and February 2022 in Turkey Global Occupational Exposure to Blood and Body Fluids among Healthcare Workers: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Baptism of Fire: Modeling the Effects of Prescribed Fire on Lyme Disease Spatiotemporal Study of COVID-19 in Fars Province, Iran, October-November 2020: Establishment of Early Warning System Emergence of SARS-CoV-2 New Variants and Their Clinical Significance
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1