COVID-19: the Symptom of a Sick System
This coronavirus crisis represents a unique opportunity to make a reflection on the health effects and economic costs of human-caused environmental impacts, a wake-up call to act and start dedicating more efforts to protect nature and ourselves.
It should not come as a surprise that our current way of living is unsustainable and needs to change. During the past few decades, the impact that humans impose on the planet has been largely emphasized, although it is only now that we are starting to realize with our own eyes how those same impacts can then rebound on our lives. Not only are we destroying nature and its non-human inhabitants at an unprecedented rate; in the process, we are also indirectly harming ourselves.
A paradigmatic example is represented by the great public health concerns attributed to pollution and climate change. As a matter of fact, it is estimated that 90% of the global population now breath polluted air every day, with around seven million people dying each year as a consequence of air pollution. Besides, according to the WHO, 250,000 additional deaths are expected per year due to climate-sensitive diseases between 2030 and 2050.
To that, we need to add the pervasive overexploitation of natural resources and the unstoppable traffic of wildlife products for the generation of superfluous commodities -such as luxury ornaments or futile aphrodisiacs- and the performance of non-proven pseudo-medical practices; not to mention the booming exotic pet trade. Inevitably, that leads to the devastation of animal populations worldwide and to the promotion of large-scale food insecurity, the weakening of essential ecosystem services from which society could benefit and the emergence of catastrophic infectious diseases such as the one that is currently spreading throughout the world: the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19).
COVID-19 is a novel zoonotic disease (i.e. a new contagious illness acquired from an animal source). It is caused by a virus widely regarded by everyone as “the coronavirus”. Coronaviruses are a large family of viruses that infect different birds and mammals (e.g. camels, cattle, cats, bats), including humans. They are responsible for a variety of diseases, such as enteritis in cows and pigs or respiratory affections in chickens and humans. To date, seven different coronaviruses have been identified in humans, of which four (HKU1, NL63, OC43 and 229E) are endemic and cause mild symptoms (1).
The other three human coronaviruses have a zoonotic origin and cause more severe symptoms. We now know that animal coronaviruses have the potential to infect humans and spread between people. It happened before: in Asia, with the so-called Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus (SARS-CoV) in 2002/2003, and in Saudi Arabia, with the so-called Middle Eastern Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) in 2012. Right now is happening again with the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the causative agent of the COVID-19, which has already been demonstrated to be natural rather than having a lab-based origin, as some voices were claiming.
Between 1940 and 2004, a total of 335 emerging infectious diseases were reported, 60% of which were zoonoses and, of those, 72% had an origin in wildlife (2). Although the exact origin of these emergent diseases is difficult to establish, it has been demonstrated that people who hunt and handle ape bushmeat in Africa expose themselves to many divergent simian viruses (3), which probably led to the origin of AIDs in 1981 (4). The Ebola virus might have had a similar origin, through the contact with an infected intermediary animal host (i.e. ape, monkey or antelope) while hunting or meat handling (5).
In the case of the 2002 SARS outbreak, it has been shown that bats were the original host of the coronavirus, although the viral agent probably made the leap to humans from a masked palm civet (6). These are cat-size mammals that inhabit the jungles of Southeast Asia and serve as intermediary hosts of the virus. They are sold in animal markets, for instance to make civet soup, a “delicacy” that only the rich can afford in China. Indeed, in the Guangdong Chinese Province, where the 2002 SARS outbreak occurred, civets were sold in animal markets.
Although the geographic origin of the COVID-19 remains a contentious issue that needs to be confirmed, the epicenter of the outbreak was soon pinpointed to the Huanan market, a large seafood and live animal market in the city of Wuhan (Hubei Province, China), after dozens of early cases were reported in people with direct links to the market. In this case, as it occurs with SARS and Ebola, it is now clear that bats act as the natural reservoir for the COVID-19 disease, although scientists are still trying to figure out the animal that could have served as an intermediary host and passed the virus down directly to us.
So far, coronaviruses isolated from bats have shown a 96% identity with the human SARS-CoV-2, whereas pangolin coronaviruses have shown an identity of up to 92.4% (7). For reference, the 2002 SARS causing coronavirus found in civets was 99.8% identical to the human counterpart (8). Therefore, whether pangolins are the intermediary hosts of the current coronavirus is still a hot theme that is currently subject to investigation and debate, although these animals are one of the most likely candidates.
Interestingly, even though the general similarity of pangolin coronaviruses to their human counterparts is lower than that of bat’s, the specific region that the coronaviruses use to recognize and bind to human cells prior to infection is almost identical in the case of pangolin coronaviruses. In contrast, the viral agents isolated from bats show significantly lower molecular similarity for that region with respect to the human coronavirus version (7).
This differences, along with the fact that bats were hibernating at the onset of the outbreak in early December 2019, suggests that bats were unlikely to have directly passed the virus to us (9). Investigations are still ongoing and we have to wait for new results. Recently, it has been suggested that the current human coronavirus could be an actual “chimera” of a SARS-CoV-2-like coronavirus coming from bats and another coronavirus coming from pangolins, although this is still under revision (9).
As civets, pangolins are cat-size mammals that can be found in Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa. There are eight different species in total and they represent the world’s most trafficked mammal as of now. They have long been used for meat, although it is the demand for the scales that cover their bodies (used for the pseudo-treatment of different ailments mainly in China and Vietnam) what is severely driving their populations down.
After the SARS outbreak of 2002/2003, Chinese authorities were reported to have drawn and electrocuted thousands of civets in an effort to eliminate a source of SARS. Shall the pangolin be confirmed as the origin of the COVID-19 outbreak, there could be concerns for similar actions. However, society should not seek any kind of revenge against wild animals, as it is the intimate contact humans make with wildlife, rather than the animals themselves, what drives epidemics. Instead, this should be seen as a wake-up call that forces the Chinese government (and others) to act and transition towards the eradication of what certainly are ineffective and environmentally harmful traditional practices that exploit and exterminate wildlife.
In this regard, China has already announced that would permanently ban the trade of wild animals destined for food, which represents an important first step forward. However, such a ban does not include the trade for fur or traditional medicine (10), which creates a loophole that can allow traffickers to keep exploiting nonfood exemptions. For example, in the case of pangolins, meat is now prohibited but these animals can still be sold for their scales. In addition, some argue that consuming wildlife is an ingrained part of the cultural local tradition and a drastic change is unlikely overnight. Alternatively, a ban might just push the business to the black market, so more actions -such as providing alternative livelihoods- would still be needed if a total ban were finally installed.
Overall, this is not easy but rather an enormous task, as thousands of people -especially in rural areas- depend on wildlife trade to subsist and the industry itself is a very profitable one. In addition to that, there are complex motivations behind wildlife consumption in China, such as societal pressure or impulse to chase status. The marginalization of millions of smallholder farmers due to the rise of large-scale farming is yet another factor that explains the expansion of businesses of exotic species in the Chinese mainland. This, along with the fact that the patterns of consumption differ a lot among regions and many people do not relate with wildlife trade, has led some to propose that the stereotype of the “Asian Super Consumer” should be debunked (11).
Certainly, China has to be accountable for its big blaming part in wildlife trade and act (12). However, in our interconnected world, if we are to counteract global problems, the response must be global as well. After all, as Laura Spinney said: “it takes a whole world to create a new virus, not just China”. As we are seeing today, the price to pay for inaction in the long-term seems to exceed the short-term costs of a transformative change, not only in China but also elsewhere. Regardless of the flag, it is imperative that governments start to lean more on scientists and international experts and implement appropriate policies, regulations and enforcement programs that effectively protect nature and prevent new outbreaks from emerging, something that will also require the active cooperation and intervention of international agencies.
Experts have long warned about the inevitability of a pandemic like this. For example, this is what Cheng and collaborators wrote back in 2007 (13):
“The presence of a large reservoir of SARS-CoV-like viruses in horseshoe bats, together with the culture of eating exotic mammals in southern China, is a time bomb”
Indeed, in 2015, scientists showed that SARS related coronaviruses had the potential to jump from bats to humans (14). That exact same year, Bill Gates gave a now-viral (note the pun) almost prophetic-like TED talk called “The next Outbreak? We are not ready yet”, raising concern about our patent lack of preparedness for a back-at-the-time upcoming -now already ongoing- epidemic. And, as soon as in October 2019, the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security hosted a fictional exercise that simulated the challenges that society would have to face in the hypothetical outbreak of a new zoonotic coronavirus case.
Unfortunately, the world did almost nothing to prevent or prepare for the outbreak of the next plague and now we are seeing the harsh consequences in terms of the global socio-economic and public health crisis that has just been unleashed by COVID-19. This disease is not the first of its kind and neither will be the last, for similar ones might be waiting ahead of us. In fact, the emergence of zoonotic diseases is increasing over time (2), and pressing environmental impacts such as the destruction of forests, urbanization and road building, along with a rapid human population growth rate, create opportunities for new outbreaks to come up, due to the increased likelihood with which animals come into repeated contact with humans.
Arguably, COVID-19 would not be here today should we have learnt from the lessons of the past. Thus, if we want to avoid similar prospective episodes in the future, governments, organizations and civil society must all act to ensure the implementation of the required instruments, regulations and prevention measures, which should necessarily include an effective and long-term ban of wildlife trade, alongside mechanisms to trace, tackle and penalize illegal animal trafficking, and the global adoption of more sustainable practices worldwide.
Our happiness, physical welfare and well-being are intrinsically subordinated to the health of our planet. More than ever before, this goes beyond a sheer spiritual view but rather is true in such a way that if we protect nature, we protect humanity as well. Ultimately, the global crisis in which we are currently submerged represents a unique opportunity to transform the sick system that slowly -and sometimes not as slowly- is destroying the planet and killing us. Or, as Carl Sagan said back in 1989, with wise words that still resonate strongly today:
“There has to be a new way of looking at the future and that is that we are all humans -members of the same species- on one fragile little planet. We are all in this together and we have to work together. That’s kind of the silver lining with these crises, they’re forcing us to become a planetary species”
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
- To see the full list of scientific paper references used, click here.
- Small edits and information updates have been added since the publication of this article, although the original message remains unaltered.
