• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

相似文献

1
A Critical Analysis of the Evidence for the SARS-CoV-2 Origin Hypotheses.对 SARS-CoV-2 起源假说证据的批判性分析。
J Virol. 2023 Apr 27;97(4):e0036523. doi: 10.1128/jvi.00365-23. Epub 2023 Mar 28.
2
A Critical Analysis of the Evidence for the SARS-CoV-2 Origin Hypotheses.对 SARS-CoV-2 起源假说证据的批判性分析。
mSphere. 2023 Apr 20;8(2):e0011923. doi: 10.1128/msphere.00119-23. Epub 2023 Mar 28.
3
A Critical Analysis of the Evidence for the SARS-CoV-2 Origin Hypotheses.对 SARS-CoV-2 起源假说证据的批判性分析。
mBio. 2023 Apr 25;14(2):e0058323. doi: 10.1128/mbio.00583-23. Epub 2023 Mar 28.
4
The unresolved question on COVID-19 virus origin: The three cards game?新冠病毒起源未解之谜:三 cards 游戏?
J Med Virol. 2022 Apr;94(4):1257-1260. doi: 10.1002/jmv.27519. Epub 2021 Dec 19.
5
The COVID lab-leak hypothesis: what scientists do and don't know.新冠病毒实验室泄漏假说:科学家所知道和不知道的
Nature. 2021 Jun;594(7863):313-315. doi: 10.1038/d41586-021-01529-3.
6
SARS-CoV-2's claimed natural origin is undermined by issues with genome sequences of its relative strains: Coronavirus sequences RaTG13, MP789 and RmYN02 raise multiple questions to be critically addressed by the scientific community.SARS-CoV-2 的所谓自然起源受到其相关毒株基因组序列问题的破坏:冠状病毒序列 RaTG13、MP789 和 RmYN02 提出了多个问题,需要科学界认真解决。
Bioessays. 2021 Jul;43(7):e2100015. doi: 10.1002/bies.202100015. Epub 2021 May 27.
7
The animal origin of SARS-CoV-2.严重急性呼吸综合征冠状病毒2(SARS-CoV-2)的动物起源
Science. 2021 Aug 27;373(6558):968-970. doi: 10.1126/science.abh0117. Epub 2021 Aug 17.
8
Meet the scientists investigating the origins of the COVID pandemic.来认识一下那些正在调查新冠疫情起源的科学家们。
Nature. 2020 Dec;588(7837):208. doi: 10.1038/d41586-020-03402-1.
9
SARS-CoV-2 origins: zoonotic vs contemporary models.SARS-CoV-2 起源:人畜共患病与当代模型。
Biotechnol Genet Eng Rev. 2023 Oct;39(2):225-258. doi: 10.1080/02648725.2022.2115682. Epub 2022 Aug 28.
10
Preliminary report of an outbreak of SARS-CoV-2 in mink and mink farmers associated with community spread, Denmark, June to November 2020.丹麦 2020 年 6 月至 11 月与社区传播相关的 SARS-CoV-2 在水貂和水貂养殖者中的暴发的初步报告。
Euro Surveill. 2021 Feb;26(5). doi: 10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2021.26.5.210009.

引用本文的文献

1
Immunoassay Detection of SARS-CoV-2 Using Monoclonal Antibody Binding to Viral Nucleocapsid Protein.使用与病毒核衣壳蛋白结合的单克隆抗体进行 SARS-CoV-2 的免疫测定检测
Microb Biotechnol. 2025 Feb;18(2):e70117. doi: 10.1111/1751-7915.70117.
2
The harms of promoting the lab leak hypothesis for SARS-CoV-2 origins without evidence.在没有证据的情况下,推广关于 SARS-CoV-2 起源的实验室泄漏假说的危害。
J Virol. 2024 Sep 17;98(9):e0124024. doi: 10.1128/jvi.01240-24. Epub 2024 Aug 1.
3
Infectious eye disease in the 21st century-an overview.二十一世纪感染性眼病概述。
Eye (Lond). 2024 Aug;38(11):2014-2027. doi: 10.1038/s41433-024-02966-w. Epub 2024 Feb 14.
4
A Brief Focus on SARS-CoV-2 Genomic Evolution and Vaccines.对严重急性呼吸综合征冠状病毒2(SARS-CoV-2)基因组进化与疫苗的简要关注
Pathogens. 2023 Oct 18;12(10):1253. doi: 10.3390/pathogens12101253.
5
Communication of COVID-19 Misinformation on Social Media by Physicians in the US.社交媒体上美国医生传播的 COVID-19 错误信息。
JAMA Netw Open. 2023 Aug 1;6(8):e2328928. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.28928.
6
Statement in Support of: "Virology under the Microscope-a Call for Rational Discourse".支持声明:“显微镜下的病毒学——呼吁理性讨论”
mBio. 2023 Jun 27;14(3):e0081523. doi: 10.1128/mbio.00815-23. Epub 2023 Apr 25.
7
Statement in Support of: "Virology under the Microscope-a Call for Rational Discourse".支持声明:“显微镜下的病毒学——呼吁理性讨论”
mSphere. 2023 Jun 22;8(3):e0016523. doi: 10.1128/msphere.00165-23. Epub 2023 Apr 25.
8
Statement in Support of: "Virology under the Microscope-a Call for Rational Discourse".支持声明:“显微镜下的病毒学——呼吁理性对话”
J Virol. 2023 May 31;97(5):e0045123. doi: 10.1128/jvi.00451-23. Epub 2023 Apr 25.

对 SARS-CoV-2 起源假说证据的批判性分析。

A Critical Analysis of the Evidence for the SARS-CoV-2 Origin Hypotheses.

机构信息

Department of Cancer Biology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.

Department of Immunobiology, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona, USA.

出版信息

J Virol. 2023 Apr 27;97(4):e0036523. doi: 10.1128/jvi.00365-23. Epub 2023 Mar 28.

DOI:10.1128/jvi.00365-23
PMID:36897089
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10134824/
Abstract

When humans experience a new, devastating viral infection such as severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), significant challenges arise. How should individuals as well as societies respond to the situation? One of the primary questions concerns the origin of the SARS-CoV-2 virus that infected and was transmitted efficiently among humans, resulting in a pandemic. At first glance, the question appears straightforward to answer. However, the origin of SARS-CoV-2 has been the topic of substantial debate primarily because we do not have access to some relevant data. At least two major hypotheses have been suggested: a natural origin through zoonosis followed by sustained human-to-human spread or the introduction of a natural virus into humans from a laboratory source. Here, we summarize the scientific evidence that informs this debate to provide our fellow scientists and the public with the tools to join the discussion in a constructive and informed manner. Our goal is to dissect the evidence to make it more accessible to those interested in this important problem. The engagement of a broad representation of scientists is critical to ensure that the public and policy-makers can draw on relevant expertise in navigating this controversy.

摘要

当人类遭遇严重急性呼吸综合征冠状病毒 2(SARS-CoV-2)等新型、具有毁灭性的病毒感染时,便会面临巨大的挑战。个人和社会应如何应对这种情况呢?其中一个主要问题涉及到感染人类并在人群中高效传播,进而引发大流行的 SARS-CoV-2 病毒的起源。乍一看,这个问题似乎很容易回答。然而,SARS-CoV-2 的起源一直是一个存在大量争议的话题,主要是因为我们无法获取一些相关数据。至少提出了两种主要假说:通过动物传染病源继而持续的人际传播,或从实验室来源引入一种天然病毒到人类体内。在这里,我们总结了支持这一争论的科学证据,为我们的科学家同仁和公众提供工具,以建设性和知情的方式参与讨论。我们的目标是剖析这些证据,使其更容易被那些对这个重要问题感兴趣的人理解。广泛代表性的科学家的参与对于确保公众和政策制定者能够在解决这一争议时借鉴相关专业知识至关重要。