Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
31 July 2020 | Story Andre Damons | Photo Supplied
Prof Felicity Burt and Prof Paul Grobler from the UFS.

Three scientists from the University of the Free State (UFS), together with authors from other institutions, are part of an international COVID-19 study published in an international peer-reviewed scientific journal recently. 

Prof Paul Grobler, Academic Head of Department: Genetics; Prof Felicity Burt, researcher from the Division of Virology, Faculty of Health Sciences and the NHLS, and SARChI (South African Research Chairs Initiative) Research Chair in vector-borne and zoonotic diseases; as well as Prof Trudy Turner from the University of Wisconsin-Milwauwkee, but also an affiliated professor in the Department of Genetics at the UFS, are co-authors of the paper that appeared in Plos One. The study is titled: ACE2 and TMPRSS2 variation in savanna monkeys (Chlorocebus spp.): Potential risk for zoonotic/anthroponotic transmission of SARS-CoV-2 and a potential model for functional studies.

 The paper follows an initiative of Prof Chris Schmitt at Boston University with researchers affiliated to the University of California, Los Angeles, Rutgers University, the Polish Academy of Sciences, the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation, the University of Antwerp, the Wake Forest School of Medicine, and the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee. The team used the opportunity presented by previously sequenced genomes to screen for variation in the genes associated with susceptibility to infection with SARS-CoV-2.

Concerns about animal welfare and conservation issues

Prof Grobler, who has been studying vervet monkeys from a conservation perspective for two decades, says considering the impact of COVID-19 on the country, he feels that any aspect that might potentially help to understand the progression and transmission of the disease, as well as unexpected risks – however small – should be investigated. 
“Since wildlife management is my field, I am of course also concerned about the potential animal welfare and conservation issues involved.  It should, however, be emphasised that while SARS-CoV-2 infection in vervet monkeys has now been shown to be genetically possible, there is no proof of it actually happening in the wild yet.” 

“I am sure that much work on COVID-19 and vervets will follow internationally, but this is the first study to describe variation at the genes linked to susceptibility,” says Prof Grobler. 

Because of his previous work with vervet monkeys in South Africa and further afield, Prof Grobler was invited by Prof Schmitt to contribute to the manuscript.

“I made some suggestions from a conservation perspective, based on my interpretations and also recent international work that have shown that many primate species may be at risk for SARS-CoV-2 infection and are potentially vulnerable to COVID-19. I also felt that some aspects of the paper would be greatly improved with input from a South African expert in zoonotic disease to add to the genetic and conservation perspectives, and I therefore requested that Prof Burt also be approached.”

Potential for non-human primates infection

Prof Burt, whose research interests and expertise include the investigation of viruses of zoonotic origin, and/or those transmitted by mosquitoes and ticks that impact human and/or animal well-being – using a One Health approach – says the study was a collaborative effort between scientists with expertise in a wide range of disciplines, including biological anthropology, genetics, primatology, molecular biology, and virology.

“The concept of One Health encourages collaboration between multiple disciplines, promoting the concept that the interaction between humans, animals, and the environment has an impact on the health of people, animals, plants, and the environment. The outcome is an exciting study that incorporates knowledge from each discipline to investigate the potential susceptibility of non-human primate populations to SARS-CoV-2.” 

“The research suggests that there is potential for novel SARS-CoV-2 to infect non-human primates, and that surveillance of non-human primates living in close proximity to human populations is not only warranted, but is actually important for defining risk to both humans and animals,” says Prof Burt. 

According to her, the majority of recently emerged viruses, including SARS-CoV-2, were zoonotic in origin. The close proximity of humans and wild non-human primates provides potential for cross-species transmission of pathogens; for some endangered species, this could have devastating effects. Similarly, identifying if non-human primates have the potential to act as intermediate hosts for pathogens with significant public health implications, would be important for understanding zoonotic transmission.

“Novel viruses are continually emerging, and we need to be prepared. A multidisciplinary approach to understanding interactions at the wildlife-human interface will be essential for the prevention of future outbreaks.”

News Archive

Stem cell research and human cloning: legal and ethical focal points
2004-07-29

   

(Summary of the inaugural lecture of Prof Hennie Oosthuizen, from the Department of Criminal and Medical Law at the Faculty of Law of the University of the Free State.)

 

In the light of stem cell research, research on embryo’s and human cloning it will be fatal for legal advisors and researchers in South Africa to ignore the benefits that new bio-medical development, through research, contain for this country.

Legal advisors across the world have various views on stem cell research and human cloning. In the USA there is no legislation that regulates stem cell research but a number of States adopted legislation that approves stem cell research. The British Parlement gave permission for research on embryonic stem cells, but determined that it must be monitored closely and the European Union is of the opinion that it will open a door for race purification and commercial exploitation of human beings.

In South Africa the Bill on National Health makes provision for therapeutical and non therapeutical research. It also makes provision for therapeutical embryonical stem cell research on fetuses, which is not older than 14 days, as well as for therapeutical cloning under certain circumstances subject to the approval of the Minister. The Bill prohibits reproductive cloning.

Research on human embrio’s is a very controversial issue, here and in the rest of the world.

Researchers believe that the use of stem cell therapy could help to side-step the rejection of newly transplanted organs and tissue and if a bank for stem cell could be built, the shortage of organs for transplants would become something of the past. Stem cells could also be used for healing of Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s and spinal injuries.

Sources from which stem cells are obtained could also lead to further ethical issues. Stem cells are harvested from mature human cells and embryonic stem cells. Another source to be utilised is to take egg cells from the ovaries of aborted fetuses. This will be morally unacceptable for those against abortions. Linking a financial incentive to that could become more of a controversial issue because the woman’s decision to abort could be influenced. The ideal would be to rather use human fetus tissue from spontaneous abortions or extra-uterine pregnancies than induced abortions.

The potential to obtain stem cells from the blood of the umbilical cord, bone-marrow and fetus tissue and for these cells to arrange themselves is known for quite some time. Blood from the umbilical cord contains many stem cells, which is the origin of the body’s immune and blood system. It is beneficial to bank the blood of a newborn baby’s umbilical cord. Through stem cell transplants the baby or another family member’s life could be saved from future illnesses such as anemia, leukemia and metabolic storing disabilities as well as certain generic immuno disabilities.

The possibility to withdraw stem cells from human embrio’s and to grow them is more useable because it has more treatment possibilities.

With the birth of Dolly the sheep, communities strongly expressed their concern about the possibility that a new cloning technique such as the replacement of the core of a cell will be used in human reproduction. Embryonic splitting and core replacement are two well known techniques that are associated with the cloning process.

I differentiate between reproductive cloning – to create a cloned human embryo with the aim to bring about a pregnancy of a child that is identical to another individual – and therapeutically cloning – to create a cloned human embryo for research purposes and for healing human illnesses.

Worldwide people are debating whether to proceed with therapeutical cloning. There are people for and against it. The biggest ethical objection against therapeutical cloning is the termination of the development of a potential human being.

Children born from cloning will differ from each other. Factors such as the uterus environment and the environment in which the child is growing up will play a role. Cloning create unique children that will grow up to be unique individuals, just like me and you that will develop into a person, just like you and me. If we understand this scientific fact, most arguments against human cloning will disappear.

Infertility can be treated through in vitro conception. This process does not work for everyone. For some cloning is a revolutionary treatment method because it is the only method that does not require patients to produce sperm and egg cells. The same arguments that were used against in vitro conception in the past are now being used against cloning. It is years later and in vitro cloning is generally applied and accepted by society. I am of the opinion that the same will happen with regard to human cloning.

There is an argument that cloning must be prohibited because it is unsafe. Distorted ideas in this regard were proven wrong. Are these distorted ideas justified to question the safety of cloning and the cloning process you may ask. The answer, according to me, is a definite no. Human cloning does have many advantages. That includes assistance with infertility, prevention of Down Syndrome and recovery from leukemia.

 

We use cookies to make interactions with our websites and services easy and meaningful. To better understand how they are used, read more about the UFS cookie policy. By continuing to use this site you are giving us your consent to do this.

Accept