Cargando…
Could flies explain the elusive epidemiology of campylobacteriosis?
BACKGROUND: Unlike salmonellosis with well-known routes of transmission, the epidemiology of campylobacteriosis is still largely unclear. Known risk factors such as ingestion of contaminated food and water, direct contact with infected animals and outdoor swimming could at most only explain half the...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2005
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC555947/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15752427 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2334-5-11 |
_version_ | 1782122572852232192 |
---|---|
author | Ekdahl, Karl Normann, Bengt Andersson, Yvonne |
author_facet | Ekdahl, Karl Normann, Bengt Andersson, Yvonne |
author_sort | Ekdahl, Karl |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Unlike salmonellosis with well-known routes of transmission, the epidemiology of campylobacteriosis is still largely unclear. Known risk factors such as ingestion of contaminated food and water, direct contact with infected animals and outdoor swimming could at most only explain half the recorded cases. DISCUSSION: We put forward the hypothesis that flies play a more important role in the transmission of the bacteria, than has previously been recognized. Factors supporting this hypothesis are: 1) the low infective dose of Campylobacter; 2) the ability of flies to function as mechanical vectors; 3) a ubiquitous presence of the bacteria in the environment; 4) a seasonality of the disease with summer peaks in temperate regions and a more evenly distribution over the year in the tropics; 5) an age pattern for campylobacteriosis in western travellers to the tropics suggesting other routes of transmission than food or water; and finally 6) very few family clusters. SUMMARY: All the evidence in favour of the fly hypothesis is circumstantial and there may be alternative explanations to each of the findings supporting the hypothesis. However, in the absence of alternative explanations that could give better clues to the evasive epidemiology of Campylobacter infection, we believe it would be unwise to rule out flies as important mechanical vectors also of this disease. |
format | Text |
id | pubmed-555947 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2005 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-5559472005-04-03 Could flies explain the elusive epidemiology of campylobacteriosis? Ekdahl, Karl Normann, Bengt Andersson, Yvonne BMC Infect Dis Debate BACKGROUND: Unlike salmonellosis with well-known routes of transmission, the epidemiology of campylobacteriosis is still largely unclear. Known risk factors such as ingestion of contaminated food and water, direct contact with infected animals and outdoor swimming could at most only explain half the recorded cases. DISCUSSION: We put forward the hypothesis that flies play a more important role in the transmission of the bacteria, than has previously been recognized. Factors supporting this hypothesis are: 1) the low infective dose of Campylobacter; 2) the ability of flies to function as mechanical vectors; 3) a ubiquitous presence of the bacteria in the environment; 4) a seasonality of the disease with summer peaks in temperate regions and a more evenly distribution over the year in the tropics; 5) an age pattern for campylobacteriosis in western travellers to the tropics suggesting other routes of transmission than food or water; and finally 6) very few family clusters. SUMMARY: All the evidence in favour of the fly hypothesis is circumstantial and there may be alternative explanations to each of the findings supporting the hypothesis. However, in the absence of alternative explanations that could give better clues to the evasive epidemiology of Campylobacter infection, we believe it would be unwise to rule out flies as important mechanical vectors also of this disease. BioMed Central 2005-03-07 /pmc/articles/PMC555947/ /pubmed/15752427 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2334-5-11 Text en Copyright © 2005 Ekdahl et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0) ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Debate Ekdahl, Karl Normann, Bengt Andersson, Yvonne Could flies explain the elusive epidemiology of campylobacteriosis? |
title | Could flies explain the elusive epidemiology of campylobacteriosis? |
title_full | Could flies explain the elusive epidemiology of campylobacteriosis? |
title_fullStr | Could flies explain the elusive epidemiology of campylobacteriosis? |
title_full_unstemmed | Could flies explain the elusive epidemiology of campylobacteriosis? |
title_short | Could flies explain the elusive epidemiology of campylobacteriosis? |
title_sort | could flies explain the elusive epidemiology of campylobacteriosis? |
topic | Debate |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC555947/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15752427 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2334-5-11 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT ekdahlkarl couldfliesexplaintheelusiveepidemiologyofcampylobacteriosis AT normannbengt couldfliesexplaintheelusiveepidemiologyofcampylobacteriosis AT anderssonyvonne couldfliesexplaintheelusiveepidemiologyofcampylobacteriosis |