̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge - pets

Opinion: Can cats really get or pass on COVID-19, as a report from Belgium suggests?

Anonymous — Tue, 31 Mar 2020 09:54:23 +0000

After reports of two dogs testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 in Hong Kong, the most recent news to cause alarm among animal owners is that of a cat in Belgium with apparent symptoms of the virus that causes COVID-19.

̽��ֱ��owner of the cat had recently tested positive for the virus. It is reported that the cat developed breathing difficulties and diarrhoea one week later. Vets at the ̽��ֱ�� of Liège, Belgium then tested the cat for SARS-CoV-2 and subsequently detected the viral genome in vomit and a stool sample.

Should we now be concerned about the virus spreading to cats? To be succinct – not yet. Several key questions need to be answered before any conclusions can be drawn from this case.

Many people are asking if the coronavirus detected in the cat really is SARS-CoV-2 or whether it could be the completely different cat-only coronavirus, which has been infecting cats worldwide for decades. ̽��ֱ��feline coronavirus exists in two forms: one causes mild gastrointestinal disease and the other causes a highly fatal disease known as feline infectious peritonitis (FIP).

Feline coronaviruses look very different to SARS-CoV-2 at the genetic level. This means that as long as the correct test was run for the cat in question, it should be easy to differentiate between the two viruses.

̽��ֱ��standard test for SARS-CoV-2 only detects the viral genome. It is very important to bear in mind that this test does not detect infectious or “live” virus particles, so it is impossible to tell whether the viral genome found in the cat was from a particle that could replicate. To demonstrate infectivity, many more tests are needed. It is possible that the cat ate contaminated food and the virus simply passed through its gut. This explanation is less likely if large quantities of genetic material were detected in the cat, but this data has not been released.

Whereas the two canine SARS-CoV-2 cases had no obvious clinical signs relating to COVID-9, the cat at the centre of the latest media attention did have respiratory symptoms. But as every vet knows, cats can have breathing difficulties for many reasons, from feline asthma to heart disease. Similarly, there is a long list of causes of diarrhoea in cats. Without knowing any clinical details of this case, we can’t tell whether COVID-19 was responsible for the disease or if this was just an upsetting coincidence.

Thankfully, there is still zero evidence of pets transmitting the virus to humans. It is also reassuring that a large veterinary diagnostic lab recently stated they have now tested thousands of cat and dog samples for SARS-CoV-2 with no positive cases. Also, given that as of March 30 there are over 720,000 human cases worldwide, it is safe to assume that if this virus readily caused disease in pets, we would know by now.

Sarah L Caddy, Clinical Research Fellow in Viral Immunology and Veterinary Surgeon, ̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge

This article is republished from ̽��ֱ��Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

How you can support Cambridge's COVID-19 research effort

Donate to support COVID-19 research at Cambridge

Should we be concerned about the coronavirus spreading to cats? Not yet, says Dr Sarah Caddy in this article for ̽��ֱ��Conversation, even after a concerning report from Belgium.

̽��ֱ��text in this work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. Images, including our videos, are Copyright © ̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge and licensors/contributors as identified. All rights reserved. We make our image and video content available in a number of ways – as here, on our main website under its Terms and conditions, and on a range of channels including social media that permit your use and sharing of our content under their respective Terms.

Yes

Pets are a child’s best friend, not their siblings

cjb250 — Thu, 26 Jan 2017 01:29:19 +0000

̽��ֱ��research adds to increasing evidence that household pets may have a major influence on child development, and could have a positive impact on children’s social skills and emotional well-being.

Pets are almost as common as siblings in western households, although there are relatively few studies on the importance of child-pet relationships.

‘‘Anyone who has loved a childhood pet knows that we turn to them for companionship and disclosure, just like relationships between people,” says Matt Cassels, a Gates Cambridge Scholar at the Department of Psychiatry, who led the study. “We wanted to know how strong these relationships are with pets relative to other close family ties. Ultimately this may enable us to understand how animals contribute to healthy child development”

This study, published in the Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, was conducted in collaboration with the WALTHAM Centre for Pet Nutrition, part of Mars Petcare and co-funded by the Economic and Social Research Council as part of a larger study, led by Prof Claire Hughes at the ̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge Centre for Family Research. Researchers surveyed 12 year old children from 77 families with one or more pets of any type and more than one child at home. Children reported strong relationships with their pets relative to their siblings, with lower levels of conflict and greater satisfaction in owners of dogs than other kinds of pets.

‘‘Even though pets may not fully understand or respond verbally, the level of disclosure to pets was no less than to siblings,” says Cassels. “ ̽��ֱ��fact that pets cannot understand or talk back may even be a benefit as it means they are completely non-judgmental.

“While previous research has often found that boys report stronger relationships with their pets than girls do, we actually found the opposite. While boys and girls were equally satisfied with their pets, girls reported more disclosure, companionship, and conflict with their pet than did boys, perhaps indicating that girls may interact with their pets in more nuanced ways.’’

“Evidence continues to grow showing that pets have positive benefits on human health and community cohesion,” says Dr Nancy Gee, Human-Animal Interaction Research Manager at WALTHAM and a co-author of the study. “ ̽��ֱ��social support that adolescents receive from pets may well support psychological well-being later in life but there is still more to learn about the long term impact of pets on children’s development.”

Reference
Cassels, M et al. One of the family? Measuring early adolescents' relationships with pets and siblings. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology; 24 Jan 2017; DOI: 10.1016/j.appdev.2017.01.003

Adapted from a press release by WALTHAM Centre for Pet Nutrition.

Children get more satisfaction from relationships with their pets than with their brothers or sisters, according to new research from the ̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge. Children also appear to get on even better with their animal companions than with siblings.

̽��ֱ��fact that pets cannot understand or talk back may even be a benefit as it means they are completely non-judgmental

Matt Cassels

CIA DE FOTO

0216

̽��ֱ��text in this work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. For image use please see separate credits above.

Yes

Licence type:

Attribution

Opinion: How to save inbred, short-faced dogs such as pugs and bulldogs from poor health

Anonymous — Tue, 02 Aug 2016 14:23:06 +0000

Short-faced dogs such as pugs, bulldogs (known as English bulldogs in the US) and French bulldogs are among the cutest pets out there – they’re the very reverse of the wolves they descended from. Over the last few years these breeds have become increasingly common, partly thanks to advertising and their popularity among celebrities. In fact all three breeds are now in Britain’s top ten favourite dogs.

But these dogs are the result of an amazing transformation in appearance and temperament caused by selective breeding, which has come at quite a cost to the dogs' health. Around half of them have breathing problems that sometimes lead to overheating, exercise intolerance and sleep apnoea. Their large heads and narrow pelvises also cause problems in giving birth (forcing Caesarean sections for many if not most) and their skin folds can become infected. Their exposed eyes are also vulnerable to damage, with about 15% suffering prolapsed third eyelids and many having other types of eye damage. Quite a number of dogs in several of the breeds also succumb to back or hip problems.

So research geneticists have started to look at ways to reduce the intrinsic health problems of these breeds. A recent investigation of genetic variation in bulldogs showed that all the individuals examined had little genetic diversity in either paternal or maternal lines. ̽��ֱ��same was true for the diversity of some types of immune system genes, so that the ability of these bulldogs to respond to pathogens may be reduced, which may potentially also be connected to common allergies in this breed. ̽��ֱ��authors argued that the breed’s health could only be restored by breeding dogs with other breeds, rather than preserving the breed in its current closed state.

With colleagues including Jane Ladlow, Lajos Kalmar and Nai-chieh Liu, I have been doing both genetic and clinical analyses of bulldogs and other short-faced breeds. Working with breeders of bulldogs, we investigated the respiratory distress that many of these dogs suffer from. We started by developing a computer algorithm to interpret breathing traces taken from dogs at rest, allowing us to objectively identify the disease and quantify variation between individuals. This analysis, together with collection of DNA samples from the studied dogs, opened the way for accurate genetic analyses of the respiratory disease. On the way, we also gained information on the genetic health of the breeds we studied as a whole.

Our findings agree with those of the new study in suggesting that the best way of breeding back to a less extreme skull shape would be to introduce dogs from outside the current breed registers. This is likely to be true of many other aspects of conformation and temperament. And we would agree that the extreme changes in appearance (such as the excessive skin rolls in these breeds) do account for many of their disease problems.

An alternative to outbreeding?

Fortunately not all short-faced dogs suffer from the respiratory disorder and although our research is not yet complete, we now have pretty strong evidence that there are still multiple genetic variations between those that do and those that don’t. But we do not know whether this is also true for other aspects of conformation and appearance-related conditions.

A bulldog being assessed by respiratory trace recording in a barometric chamber. Traces from another dog on the right. Author provided

We believe that the swiftest way to remove these diseases would be to outbreed to a dog type that does not have the features that cause the health problems typical of these breeds.

Over the last few years groups such as the (now disbanded) Advisory Council on the Welfare Aspects of Dog Breeding, the RSPCA, a number of dog welfare charities and the Associate Parliamentary Group on Animal Welfare have offered a lot of advice about the health problems of these dogs in an attempt to reduce their popularity. Yet the kind of expensive advertising campaign that could really reach the public has been lacking.

An additional problem is that most breeders reject the introduction of genes from outside their breed. They fear the breed will “be contaminated”, that new diseases will be introduced and that the breed will lose its character or change in temperament. There appears to be no likelihood of legislation to compel breeders to outbreed on welfare grounds.

But with the help of our research it may be possible to breed for healthier dogs using the existing genetic variation within the breed (in addition to contributions from crosses outside the breed if necessary and if they can be made acceptable to breeders). If within-breed crosses to reduce disease do prove practical, this will probably be a slower route to reduce the disease burden for an individual offspring than an outcross-breed. However, the advantage is that within-breed crosses are likely to be widely accepted by dog breeders and so it may prove a quicker way of moving the whole population forward towards better breed health.

David Sargan, Senior Lecturer in Molecular Pathology at the Department of Veterinary Medicine, ̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge

This article was originally published on ̽��ֱ��Conversation. Read the original article.

̽��ֱ��opinions expressed in this article are those of the individual author(s) and do not represent the views of the ̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge.

David Sargan (Department of Veterinary Medicine) discusses the health implications of breeding the perfect pets.

̽��ֱ��text in this work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. For image use please see separate credits above.

Yes

Are you a dog-person, a cat-person, or a bear-person?

amb206 — Wed, 16 Sep 2015 08:50:09 +0000

Scroll to the end of the article to listen to the podcast.

̽��ֱ��scale of contemporary pet keeping is remarkable. In the US, ‘fur babies’ outnumber human babies. In the UK, almost a quarter of households have a dog and almost a fifth owns a cat. Fish (often listed among pets) are even more popular.

̽��ֱ��keeping of these pets is one of the most significant of all human-animal relationships. ̽��ֱ��majority of pets live as part of the family. At the same time, many are poorly treated and animal activists have called into question the legitimacy of keeping pets at all.

What is a pet? ̽��ֱ��answer may seem straightforward: they are animals kept in the home for pleasure and companionship. But our interactions with pets are far more complex, rooted as much in ownership and domination as in sentimentality and affection.

In his recent book At Home and Astray, cultural geographer Dr Philip Howell explores the ways in which the Victorians brought favoured animals in from the cold, to enjoy a place at the centre of the domestic sphere, while relegating unwanted others to shelters and inevitable destruction.

Here Howell engages in a broad-ranging conversation about pets with PhD student Makoto Takahashi. They begin with a discussion about pets at their most extreme: the English poet Byron kept a bear at Cambridge and the French poet Gérard de Nerval walked a lobster on a silk ribbon. They go on to examine both the lighter and darker sides of pet keeping as a national obsession.

Next in the Cambridge Animal Alphabet: Q is for a creature that has seen a dramatic decline in the past 80 years, with two of the UK’s 26 species now extinct.

Have you missed the series so far? Catch up on Medium here.

The Cambridge Animal Alphabet series celebrates Cambridge's connections with animals through literature, art, science and society. Here, P is for Pet. Cultural geographer Dr Philip Howell and PhD student Makoto Takahashi examine both the lighter and darker sides of pet keeping as a national obsession.

Wikimedia Commons

A toy spaniel, a Pomeranian and a Maltese terrier at a basket – Oil on Canvas by Johann Friedrich Wilhelm Wegener 1855

̽��ֱ��text in this work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. For image use please see separate credits above.

Yes

How the dog found a place in the family home – from the Victorian age to ours

amb206 — Fri, 15 May 2015 14:01:54 +0000

̽��ֱ��British are a nation of dog lovers: almost a quarter of households have at least one. Perhaps we love them too much. One wit famously described the English upper classes as people who sleep with their dogs and put their children into kennels.

But when did the nation fall so hopelessly in love with dogs? And what were the limits to this affection? Cambridge academic Dr Philip Howell argues that it was the Victorians who sealed the fate of the dog as a household pet and gave it a much-cherished, but also contentious, role at the heart of the family.

In At Home and Astray: ̽��ֱ��Domestic Dog in Victorian London (published on 30 April 2015 by ̽��ֱ�� of Virginia Press), Howell suggests that the family dog as we know it today was ‘invented’ in the London of the 19^th century.

In a series of themed chapters, Howell’s fascinating analysis throws light on a period that saw rapid change in human-animal relationships within the urban context – a shift that saw the development of the pet industry as well as the beginnings of ‘animal rights’.

As a cultural geographer, Howell is particularly interested in space, and the ways in which people and animals share space. ̽��ֱ��key boundary line lay between the private and public zones of the city. ̽��ֱ��dog became properly private – as a pet – but only at the expense of being expelled from the public realm – as a stray. ̽��ֱ��dog was portrayed as an animal that naturally loved the family, and suffered as a ‘homeless’ vagrant on the streets.

̽��ֱ��second half of the 19^th century was an era when London’s population boomed. ̽��ֱ��newly affluent middle classes became increasingly focused on the creation of the home as an oasis of domestic bliss. At the same time, Londoners became increasingly ‘unmoored’ from the natural world as many animals (with the notable exception of horses) disappeared from view.

As London grew, sanitation regulations were imposed. ̽��ֱ��herds of dairy cows needed to supply the capital with milk migrated away from the centre of the city. Abattoirs and livestock markets were shifted to outlying districts. From the mid-19^th century, sheep and cattle, pigs and geese were no longer driven through the streets of central London. Even dog carts were banned.

Howell argues that, as other animals disappeared from the streets, the pet dog filled a vacuum. Dogs (or at least certain ‘polite’ dogs) were invited in from the cold of the backyard, or kennel, to join the family at the fireside. In the intimate space of the domestic world, the dog was precious rather than productive, even child-like in its reliance on the humans that surrounded it.

In the bosom of the family, the dog gained a name, a personal narrative and, at the end of its life, a burial place. As pets, dogs were mourned by their owners, who interred them in pet cemeteries where their final resting places were marked by gravestones. ̽��ֱ��reverse was true too: in best known sagas, dogs mourned their owners. Banished from his master’s grave, a Skye terrier called Greyfriars Bobby kept faithful vigil in Greyfriars Churchyard in Edinburgh for 14 years.

Bolstered by its reputation for unswerving loyalty, the domestic dog was not just petted but clearly anthropomorphised. Cuddled, coiffed and beribboned, it was also feminised. This highly prized pet dog was an easy target for thieves. By 1837, an estimated 141 dog stealers were operating in London. In a sequence of events, later immortalised by Virginia Woolf in her novel Flush, the poet Elizabeth Barrett’s cocker spaniel was stolen by a notorious ‘dognapper’. He was returned for a ransom of six guineas.

̽��ֱ��rise in popularity of the dog and a concern for the fate of animals in the streets was also accompanied by the emergence of the first homes for street dogs. A ‘Temporary Home for Lost and Starving dogs’ opened in Holloway in 1860: moving south, it became the famous Battersea Dogs Home.

̽��ֱ��Times scoffed at the sentimentality evident in the provision of a facility for homeless dogs. ̽��ֱ��newspaper commented that it “expected that human benevolence would have its limits, and that those limits would be marked somewhere within the regions of humanity, as far as mere sentimental interference was concerned”. Why should there not be a home for rats, it wondered with tortured logic.

̽��ֱ��problem of strays was certainly acute: in 1869 it was reported of London that “during the five months of the police raid against wandering curs, 12,465 dogs were taken into the ‘Home’ where a gentle quietus was administered to the halt, blind, maimed and diseased; and the rest were either restored to their owners or placed with new ones”.

̽��ֱ��description ‘home’, suggests Howell, is also highly significant: ‘a good home’ was what a dog needed in order to find salvation from wickedness – and it was analogous to the homes set up to offer shelter and a better life to fallen women. Battersea Dogs Home provided a route to salvation for some lucky dogs – but also put down the strays that could not be ‘rehomed’.

In the end, the British, like most nationalities, have a curious relationship with dogs. Pets are pampered and their pedigrees celebrated. Dogs on the streets are animals to fear and avoid – feral, diseased and dangerous. As Howell points out, we may be a nation of dog lovers, but it is a conditional kind of love.

At Home and Astray: ̽��ֱ��Domestic Dog in Victorian London by Philip Howell is published by ̽��ֱ�� of Virginia Press. https://www.amazon.co.uk/At-Home-Astray-Domestic-Victorian/dp/0813936861

Inset images: At Home and Astray: ̽��ֱ��Domestic Dog in Victorian London by Philip Howell ( ̽��ֱ�� of Virginia Press); A dognapper in action: Briton Riviere, Temptation, 1879. (Private collection); ‘A prisoner of want and hunger and neglect’ John Charles Dollman, “Supported by Voluntary Contributions,” Illustrated London News, 15 December 1875, 20 (Reproduced by permission of the British Library).

Dogs have been companions to humans for tens of thousands of years. In a new book, Dr Philip Howell argues that it was the Victorians who ‘invented’ the modern dog with a place at the heart of the family. But, as some dogs became pets, others became pests.

In the bosom of the family, the dog gained a name, a personal narrative and, at the end of its life, a burial place.

Courtesy of National Museums Liverpool

Feeding time at Battersea Dogs Home. John Charles Dollman, Table d’Hôte at a Dogs Home, 1879.

̽��ֱ��text in this work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. For image use please see separate credits above.

Yes

First randomised controlled trial to show spinal cord regeneration in dogs

fpjl2 — Mon, 19 Nov 2012 14:54:25 +0000

In a collaboration between the ̽��ֱ��’s Veterinary School and MRC’s Regenerative Medicine Centre, scientists used a unique type of cell to regenerate the damaged part of the dogs’ spines. ̽��ֱ��researchers are cautiously optimistic that the work could have a future role in the treatment of human patients with similar injuries if used alongside other treatments.

Scientists have been aware for over a decade that olfactory ensheathing cells (OEC) might be useful in treating the damaged spinal cord because of their unique properties. ̽��ֱ��cells have the ability to support nerve fibre growth that maintains a pathway between the nose and the brain.

Previous research using laboratory animals has already revealed that OECs can aid regeneration of the parts of nerve cells that transmit signals (axons) so as to form a ‘bridge’ between damaged and undamaged spinal cord tissue. A Phase 1 trial in human patients with SCI established that the procedure is safe.

̽��ֱ��study, published in the latest issue of the neurology journal Brain, is the first double-blinded randomised controlled trial to test the effectiveness of these transplants to improve function in ‘real-life’ spinal cord injury. ̽��ֱ��trial was performed on animals that had spontaneous and accidental injury rather than in the controlled environment of a laboratory, and some time after the injury occurred. This far more closely resembles the way in which the procedure might be used in human patients.

̽��ֱ��34 pet dogs had all suffered severe spinal cord injury. Twelve months or more after the injury, they were unable to use their back legs to walk and unable to feel pain in their hindquarters. Many of the dogs were dachshunds which are particularly prone to this type of injury. Dogs are also more likely to suffer from SCIs because the spinal cord may be damaged as a result of what in humans is the relatively minor condition of a slipped disc.

In the study, funded by the MRC, one group of dogs had olfactory ensheathing cells from the lining of their own nose injected into the injury site. ̽��ֱ��other group of dogs was injected with just the liquid in which the cells were transplanted. Neither the researchers nor the owners (nor the dogs!) knew which injection they were receiving.

̽��ֱ��dogs were observed for adverse reactions for 24 hours before being returned to their owners. From then on, they were tested at one month intervals for neurological function and to have their gait analysed on a treadmill while being supported in a harness. In particular, the researchers analysed the dogs’ ability to co-ordinate movement of their front and back limbs.

̽��ֱ��group of dogs that had received the OEC injection showed considerable improvement that was not seen in the other group. These animals moved previously paralysed hind limbs and co-ordinated the movement with their front legs. This means that in these dogs neuronal messages were being conducted across the previously damaged part of the spinal cord. However, the researchers established that the new nerve connections accounting for this recovery were occurring over short distances within the spinal cord and not over the longer distances required to connect the brain with the spinal cord.

Professor Robin Franklin, a co-author of the study from the Wellcome Trust-MRC Cambridge Stem Cell Institute, ̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge, said: “Our findings are extremely exciting because they show for the first time that transplanting these types of cell into a severely damaged spinal cord can bring about significant improvement. We’re confident that the technique might be able to restore at least a small amount of movement in human patients with spinal cord injuries but that’s a long way from saying they might be able to regain all lost function. It’s more likely that this procedure might one day be used as part of a combination of treatments, alongside drug and physical therapies, for example.”

Dr Rob Buckle, Head of Regenerative Medicine at the MRC, commented: “This proof of concept study on pet dogs with the type of injury sustained by human spinal patients is tremendously important and an excellent basis for further research in an area where options for treatment are extremely limited. It’s a great example of collaboration between veterinary and regenerative medicine researchers that has had an excellent outcome for the pet participants and potentially for human patients.”

̽��ֱ��researchers stress that human patients with a spinal injury rate a return in sexual function and continence far higher than improved mobility. Some of the dogs in the study did regain bowel and bladder control but the number of these was not statistically significant.

Mrs May Hay, owner of Jasper who took part in the trail (and can be seen in the video), said: “Before the trial, Jasper was unable to walk at all. When we took him out we used a sling for his back legs so that he could exercise the front ones. It was heartbreaking. But now we can’t stop him whizzing round the house and he can even keep up with the two other dogs we own. It’s utterly magic.”

Text courtesy of the Medical Research Council

Researchers have shown it is possible to restore co-ordinated limb movement in dogs with severe spinal cord injury (SCI).

Our findings are extremely exciting because they show for the first time that transplanting these types of cell into a severely damaged spinal cord can bring about significant improvement.

Robin Franklin

Cambridge Veterinary School

A dog called Jasper during the trial

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Licence. If you use this content on your site please link back to this page.

Yes