Bats probably aren't more likely to spread viruses to humans than other animals, study suggests

There's a lot of suspicion that the COVID-19 coronavirus originated in bats, perhaps jumping to another species first before infecting humans. It's added to the notion that bats might harbor an excess number of zoonotic viruses (diseases that spread from animals to human) considering Ebola may have been transferred from them, as well.

But research from the University of Glasgow found the proportion of zoonotic viruses in bats doesn't differ significantly across 11 major orders of birds and mammals, and that the number that have emerged from them are line with expectations for "any mammalian group of their size." In other words, bats don't pose a higher risk of spreading viruses to humans than many other animals.

That doesn't mean bats shouldn't be studied, said Dr. Narcus Mollentze, a research assistant at the university's Centre for Virus Research. Their potential connection to COVID-19 and Ebola certainly warrant a deeper look, but the study is really implying that "ongoing efforts to identify potential future threats to human health by screening animals for undiscovered viruses will need to focus on a much wider change than is currently the case."

Subscribe to The Week

Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.

SUBSCRIBE & SAVE

Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters

From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.

From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.

Sign up

Ultimately, though, scientists tend to believe that a better understanding of the characteristics of the viruses themselves, rather than their animal host, will be more telling about zoonotic transmission. Read more at RTE.