Showing posts with label chlamydia. Show all posts
Showing posts with label chlamydia. Show all posts

Saturday, October 11, 2014

Yes, demons do exist


 
Chlamydia infection rate, by country (WHO 2004, Wikicommons). Sub-Saharan Africa has been a natural laboratory for the evolution of sexually transmitted pathogens, including strains that can manipulate their hosts.


 


Are we being manipulated by microbes? The idea is not so whacky. We know that a wide range of microscopic parasites have evolved the ability to manipulate their hosts, even to the point of making the host behave in strange ways. A well-known example is Toxoplasma gondii, a protozoan whose life cycle begins inside a cat. After being excreted in the cat's feces, it is picked up by a mouse and enters the new host's brain, where it neutralizes the fear response to the smell of cat urine. The mouse lets itself be eaten by a cat, and the protozoan returns to a cat's gut—the only place where it can reproduce (Flegr, 2013).

T. gondii can also infect us and alter our behavior. Infected individuals have longer reaction times, higher testosterone levels, and a greater risk of developing severe forms of schizophrenia (Flegr, 2013). But there is no reason to believe that T. gondii is the only such parasite we need to worry about. We study it in humans simply because we already know what it does in a non-human species.

Researchers are starting to look at manipulation by another human parasite, a sexually transmitted bacterium called Chlamydia trachomatis. Zhong et al. (2011) have found that it synthesizes proteins that manipulate the signalling pathways of its human host. These proteins seem to facilitate reinfection, although there may be other effects:

Despite the significant progresses made in the past decade, the precise mechanisms on what and how chlamydia-secreted proteins interact with host cells remain largely unknown, and will therefore still represent major research directions of the chlamydial field in the foreseeable future. (Zhong et al., 2011)

What else would a sexually transmitted pathogen do to its host? For one thing, it could cause infertility:

 


While several nonsexually transmitted infections can also cause infertility (e.g., schistosomiasis, tuberculosis, leprosy), these infections are typically associated with high overall virulence. In contrast, STIs tend to cause little mortality and morbidity; thus, the effect on fertility seems to be more "targeted" and specific. In addition, several STI pathogens are also associated with an increased risk of miscarriage and infant mortality (Apari et al., 2014)

Chlamydia is a major cause of infertility, and this effect seems to be no accident. Its outer membrane contains a heat shock protein that induces cell death (apoptosis) in placenta cells that are vital for normal fetal development. The same protein exists in other bacteria but is located within the cytoplasm, where it can less easily affect the host's tissues. Furthermore, via this protein, Chlamydia triggers an autoimmune response that can damage the fallopian tubes and induce abortion. This response is not triggered by the common bacterium Escherichia coli. Finally, Chlamydia selectively up-regulates the expression of this protein while down-regulating the expression of most other proteins (Apari et al., 2014).

But how would infertility benefit Chlamydia and other sexually transmitted pathogens? Apari et al. (2011) argue that infertility causes the host and her partner to break up and seek new partners, thus multiplying the opportunities for the pathogen to spread to other hosts. A barren woman may pair up with a succession of partners in a desperate attempt to prove her fertility and, eventually, turn to prostitution as a means to support herself (Caldwell et al., 1989). This is not a minor phenomenon. STI-induced infertility has exceeded 40% in parts of sub-Saharan Africa (Apari et al., 2011).



It gets kinkier and kinkier

Does the manipulation stop there? We know, for instance, that sexual promiscuity correlates with the risk of contracting different STIs, but is this a simple relationship of cause and effect? Could an STI actually promote infidelity by stimulating sexual fantasizing about people other than one's current partner?

Let's look at another pathogen, Candida albicans, commonly known as vaginal yeast, which can cause an itchy rash called vulvovaginal candidiasis (VVC). Reed et al. (2003) found no significant association between VVC and the woman's frequency of vaginal sex, lifetime number of partners, or duration of current relationship. Nor was there any association with presence of C. albicans in her male partner. But there were significant associations with the woman masturbating or practicing cunnilingus in the past month.

VVC is thus more strongly associated with increased sexual fantasizing, as indicated by masturbation rate, than with a higher frequency of vaginal intercourse. This does look like host manipulation, although one might wonder why it doesn't translate into more sex with other men, this being presumably what the pathogen wants. Perhaps the development of masturbation as a lifestyle (through use of vibrators and pornography) is making this outcome harder to achieve.

A sexually transmitted pathogen can also increase its chances of transmission by disrupting mate guarding. This is the tendency of one mate, usually the male, to keep watch over the other mate. If mate guarding can be disabled or, better yet, reversed, the pathogen can spread more easily to other hosts. This kind of host manipulation has been shown in a non-human species (Mormann, 2010).

Do we see reversal of mate guarding in humans? Yes, it's called cuckold envy—the desire to see another man have sex with your wife—and it's become a common fetish. Yet it seems relatively recent. Greco-Roman texts don't mention it, despite abundant references to other forms of alternate sexual behavior, e.g., pedophilia, cunnilingus, fellatio, bestiality, etc. The earliest mentions appear in 17th century England (Kuchar, 2011, pp. 18-19). This was when England was opening up to world trade and, in particular, to the West African slave trade.

Sub-Saharan Africa has been especially conducive to sexually transmitted pathogens evolving a capacity for host manipulation. Polygyny rates are high, in the range of 20 to 40% of all adult males, and the polygynous male is typically an older man who cannot sexually satisfy all of his wives. There is thus an inevitable tendency toward multi-partner sex by both men and women, which sexually transmitted pathogens can exploit ... and manipulate.



What about sexual orientation?

A pathogen can also become more transmissible by giving its host a new sexual orientation. This strategy would disrupt the existing pair bond while opening up modes of transmission that may be more efficient than the penis/vagina one. Some vaginal strains of Candida albicans have adapted to oral sex by becoming better at adhering to saliva-coated surfaces (Schmid et al., 1995). Certain species that cause bacterial vaginosis, notably Gardnerella vaginalis and Prevotella, seem to specialize in female-female transmission (Muzny et al., 2013; Sobel, 2012).

Finally, there is the hypothesis that exclusive male homosexuality has a microbial origin (Cochran et al., 2000). Its main shortcomings are that (a) there is no candidate pathogen and that (b) exclusive male homosexuality has been observed in social environments with limited opportunities for pathogen transmission, such as small bands of hunter-gatherers across pre-Columbian North America (Callender & Kochems, 1983). On the other hand, there seems to have been a relatively recent shift in European societies from facultative to exclusive male homosexuality, so something may have happened in the environment, perhaps the introduction of a new pathogen (Frost, 2009).

Both male and female homosexuality seem to have multiple causes, but it’s likely that various pathogens have exploited this means of spreading to other hosts.



Conclusion


This is a fun subject when it concerns silly mice or zombie ants. But now it concerns us. And that's not so funny. Can microbes really develop such demonic abilities to change our private thoughts and feelings?

It does seem hard to believe. Perhaps this is an argument for intelligent design. After all, only an all-knowing designer could have made creatures that are so small and yet capable of so much ... things like inducing abortion, breaking up marriages, and altering normal sexual desires. Yes, such an argument could be made.

But I don't think anyone will bother.

 


References


Apari, P., J. Dinis de Sousa, and V. Muller. (2014). Why Sexually Transmitted Infections Tend to Cause Infertility: An Evolutionary Hypothesis. PLoS Pathog 10(8): e1004111.

http://www.plospathogens.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.ppat.1004111

Caldwell, J.C., P. Caldwell, and P. Quiggin. (1989). The social context of AIDS in sub-Saharan Africa, Population and Development Review, 15, 185-234.

https://www.soc.umn.edu/~meierann/Teaching/Population/Readings/Feb%209%20Caldwell.pdf

Callender, C. and L.M. Kochems. (1983). The North American Berdache, Current Anthropology, 24, 443-470.

http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/2742448?uid=3739448&uid=2&uid=3737720&uid=4&sid=21104311299061

 



Cochran, G.M., P.W. Ewald, and K.D. Cochran. (2000). Infection causation of disease: an evolutionary perspective, Perspectives in Biology and Medicine, 43, 406-448.

http://www.isteve.com/infectious_causation_of_disease.pdf

Flegr, J. (2013). Influence of latent Toxoplasma infection on human personality, physiology and morphology: pros and cons of the Toxoplasma-human model in studying the manipulation hypothesis, The Journal of Experimental Biology, 216, 127-133. http://jeb.biologists.org/content/216/1/127.full

 


Frost, P. (2009). Has male homosexuality changed over time, Evo and Proud, March 5

http://evoandproud.blogspot.ca/2009/03/has-male-homosexuality-changed-over.html

Kuchar, G. (2001). Rhetoric, Anxiety, and the Pleasures of Cuckoldry in the Drama of Ben Jonson and Thomas Middleton, Journal of Narrative Theory, 31 (1), Winter, pp. 1-30.

 


Mormann, K. (2010). Factors influencing parasite-related suppression of mating behavior in the isopod Caecidotea intermedius, Theses and Disserations, paper 48

http://via.library.depaul.edu/etd/48

 



Muzny, C.A., I.R. Sunesara, R. Kumar, L.A. Mena, M.E. Griswold, et al. (2013). Correction: Characterization of the vaginal microbiota among sexual risk behavior groups of women with bacterial vaginosis. PLoS ONE 8(12):

http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0080254

 



Reed, B.D., P. Zazove, C.L. Pierson, D.W. Gorenflo, and J. Horrocks. (2003). Candida transmission and sexual behaviors as risks for a repeat episode of Candida vulvovaginitis, Journal of Women's Health, 12, 979-989.

http://online.liebertpub.com/doi/abs/10.1089/154099903322643901

 



Schmid, J., P.R. Hunter, G.C. White, A.K. Nand, and R.D. Cannon. (1995). Physiological traits associated with success of Candida albicans strains as commensal colonizers and pathogens, Journal of Clinical Microbiology, 33, 2920-2926.

http://jcm.asm.org/content/33/11/2920.short

 



Sobel, J.D. (2012). Bacterial vaginosis, Wolters Kluwer, UpToDate

http://www.uptodate.com/contents/bacterial-vaginosis

 



Zhong, G., L. Lei, S. Gong, C. Lu, M. Qi, and D. Chen. (2011). Chlamydia-Secreted Proteins in Chlamydial Interactions with Host Cells, Current Chemical Biology, 5, 29-37

http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/ben/ccb/2011/00000005/00000001/art00004

Saturday, September 28, 2013

Brainwashed by a microbe?


Toxoplasma gondii (source: A.J. Cann)


It’s long been known that many organisms are parasites, i.e., they survive by living off a host. In recent years we’ve learned that some of them can improve on their life strategy by manipulating their host’s behavior. A fungus, Ophiocordyceps unilateralis, will invade an ant’s brain and direct its host to go to the right height above ground, lock itself into position … and die (Ophiocordycepsunilateralis, 2013). A tapeworm, Schistocephalus solidus, will infect a fish and cause its host to turn white and prefer the water surface, thereby making it an easy prey for a passing bird—the next stage in the worm’s life cycle (Fish diseases and parasites, 2013). A protozoan, Toxoplasma gondii, after being excreted in cat feces and then picked up by a mouse, will infiltrate the brain of its new host and neutralize the fear response to the smell of cat urine. The host thus becomes a way to get back into a cat’s gut—the only place where this protozoan can sexually reproduce (Ingram et al., 2013).

 



Ants, fish, mice … The sequence is troubling. What about us? Have some microbes evolved to manipulate our brains? Perhaps, but it would be hard to prove. For one thing, we’re continually being infected by seemingly benign microbes that trigger no symptoms of infection, i.e., fever, pus formation, immune response, etc. They go about their business without our knowing they’re inside us.


For another thing, a microbe can permanently alter our mental wiring and then be removed from our body. The culprit vanishes from the scene of the crime and leaves only a few ambiguous clues. This is the conclusion of a recent study on Toxoplasma gondii. When mice were infected with a weakened strain of this protozoan, they were able to overcome the infection and clear all traces of it from their brains. Yet the behavioral change remained:


[…] our data indicate that infection with all three major North American T. gondii clonal lineages results in loss of innate, hard-wired aversion to feline predator urine in mice. […] permanent interruption of mouse innate aversion to feline urine is a general trait of T. gondii infection that occurs within the first three weeks, independent of parasite persistence and ongoing brain inflammation. (Ingram etal., 2013)

It seems that T. gondii moves around the host’s brain and alters many neurons without actually taking up residence in them, apparently by injecting specific proteins through the cell wall.

Although we’re not a natural host, T. gondii does appear to alter human behavior:

 


Toxoplasma-infected subjects differ from uninfected controls in the personality profile estimated with two versions of Cattell’s 16PF, Cloninger’s TCI and Big Five questionnaires. Most of these differences increase with the length of time since the onset of infection, suggesting that Toxoplasma influences human personality rather than human personality influencing the probability of infection. Toxoplasmosis increases the reaction time of infected subjects, which can explain the increased probability of traffic accidents in infected subjects reported in three retrospective and one very large prospective case-control study. […] Toxoplasma-infected male students are about 3 cm taller than Toxoplasma-free subjects and their faces are rated by women as more masculine and dominant. These differences may be caused by an increased concentration of testosterone. Toxoplasma also appears to be involved in the initiation of more severe forms of schizophrenia. At least 40 studies confirmed an increased prevalence of toxoplasmosis among schizophrenic patients. Toxoplasma-infected schizophrenic patients differ from Toxoplasma-free schizophrenic patients by brain anatomy and by a higher intensity of the positive symptoms of the disease. (Flegr, 2013)


T. gondii is being studied for possible behavioral effects mainly because it has attracted so much attention. But we’re probably being manipulated by other parasites. “A large number of parasitic organisms probably exist in helminths, protozoa, fungi, bacteria, archea and viruses that may influence the phenotype of their human host even more than the Toxoplasma. These organisms are, however, still waiting for research teams to engage in a systematic study of their influence on the human host” (Flegr, 2013).

Where to look? Cherchez la femme. Sexually transmitted diseases have much to gain from altering host behavior. I would especially look at bacterial vaginosis, chlamydia, and vaginal yeast.

References

 


Fish diseases and parasites. (2013). Wikipedia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fish_diseases_and_parasites

Flegr, J. (2013). Influence of latent Toxoplasma infection on human personality, physiology and morphology: pros and cons of the Toxoplasma–human model in studying the manipulation hypothesis, The Journal of Experimental Biology, 216, 127-133. http://jeb.biologists.org/content/216/1/127.full

 


Ingram, W.M., L.M. Goodrich, E.A. Robey, and M.B. Eisen (2013). Mice infected with low-virulence strains of Toxoplasma gondii lose their innate aversion to cat urine, even after extensive parasite clearance. PLoS ONE 8(9): e75246. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0075246

http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0075246



Ophiocordyceps unilateralis. (2013). Wikipedia

Saturday, April 20, 2013

The gay germ hypothesis


Incidence of chlamydia, a major cause of infertility. The high polygyny rate among the “female farming” peoples of sub-Saharan Africa may have favored the evolution of STDs. Is this where we should look for the precursor of the hypothetical “gay germ”? (source)

 


Heritability for male homosexuality is low to moderate (30 to 45%). There is thus some kind of genetic predisposition, but it’s weak and may simply be a low degree of pre-natal androgenization. All things being equal, such individuals would still develop a heterosexual orientation.

But all things aren’t equal. Something out there is tipping these individuals over the threshold that separates heterosexual from homosexual orientation. What is it? I suspect there are several causes, including the rising level of estrogens and estrogen-like substances in the environment over the past century (see previous post).


The cause may also be a pathogen that alters its host’s sexual orientation in order to enhance its chances of spreading to other hosts. This is the “gay germ” theory proposed by Greg Cochran (Cochran et al., 2000). It’s interesting, and there are certainly precedents for this kind of psychological manipulation … from zombie ants to rats losing their fear of cats.


But so far there’s no smoking gun. No candidate pathogens have been identified, although some STDs seem to have adapted to non-heterosexual modes of transmission, e.g., the bacterium responsible for bacterial vaginosis, particularly Gardnerella vaginalis, and some strains of vaginal yeast (see previous post).

Another objection is that natural selection should reduce host susceptibility. As Ron Unz (2013) has recently argued:

Cochran and others ridicule the gene model as absurd, arguing that strong selective pressure would have rapidly eliminated any such genes from the population, and this is not unreasonable. But similar criticism could applied to their own model, since genetic susceptibility to the germ would obviously be subject to equally powerful selective disadvantage.

A lot of pathogens seem undeterred by this argument. People die all the time from infections of one sort or another. One reason is that pathogens have shorter generation times and thus can evolve faster than their hosts can. An evolutionary equilibrium will eventually fall into place, but it will be heavily weighted in the pathogen’s favor. There are also limits to what a host can do. If the host’s defense system becomes too sensitive, it will attack not only possible pathogens but also host tissues.

Still, the most catastrophic epidemics tend to burn themselves out, largely because they destroy the pool of individuals they can most easily spread amongst. The Plague of Justinian of the 6th and 7th centuries may have wiped out half of Europe’s population. Then it disappeared. The Black Death of the 14th century killed between one and two thirds of all Europeans. It too disappeared, the last possible outbreaks being in the 18th century. This is not the case, however, with STDs, even in places where the consequences are dramatic, such as Africa’s “infertility belt”:

Africa shares the largest burden of infertility in the world. Estimates indicate that an average of 10.1% of couples experience infertility in Africa, with a high percentage of 32% in some countries and ethnic groups within Africa. An infertility belt” spreading through West Africa, through Central Africa to East Africa has been described. In some countries in this belt, up to one-third of women may be childless at the end of their reproductive lives. (Okonofu & Obi, 2009)

A pathogen would not sterilize one third of the population, generation after generation, unless it had something to gain, as Ron Unz notes. In sub-Saharan Africa, infertility can lead to abandonment of the wife, thus making her a better vehicle for pathogen transmission:

The high prevalence of untreated STD, resulting in increased infertility acts paradoxically to increase rather than decrease the fertility in Africa. Infertility is devastating for an African woman, resulting in divorce and diminished social status that often leads to prostitution. The fear of infertility results in refusal of contraception and early childbearing to demonstrate fertility. (O’Reilly, 1986)


Other separated women owe their status to infertility, which is a frequent reason for being driven from marriage and for being unable to marry […] Nadel […] identified such women as a major source of prostitutes: “Adultery and unchastity count less in her than other women. [The] paramount stigma [is] barrenness itself.” (Caldwell et al.,1989)

The existence of Africa’s infertility belt is generally attributed to a high prevalence of STDs, particularly gonorrhea and chlamydia (Collet et al., 1988), which in turn is related to a high polygyny rate (20 to 40% of all sexual unions throughout most of sub-Saharan Africa), which in turn is related to the low cost of maintaining a second or third wife, which in turn is related to year-round hoe farming and the ability of women to support themselves and their children with little male assistance.

We know that the AIDS virus evolved in sub-Saharan Africa, and it may be that syphilis evolved out of yaws, likewise endemic to sub-Saharan Africa. It may be that this region favors the evolution of STDs; if so, we might best look for the precursor of the “gay germ” there as well, assuming of course that it does exist.

 


References

Caldwell, J.C., P. Caldwell, and P. Quiggin. (1989). The social context of AIDS in sub-Saharan Africa, Population and Development Review, 15, 185-234.

https://www.soc.umn.edu/~meierann/Teaching/Population/Readings/Feb%209%20Caldwell.pdf



Collet, M., J. Reniers, E. Frost, R. Gass, F. Yvert, A. Leclerc, C. Roth-Meyer, B. Ivanoff, and A. Meheus. (1988). Infertility in Central Africa: Infection is the cause, International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics, 26, 423–428 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0020-7292(88)90340-2


Cochran, G.M., Ewald, P.W., and Cochran, K.D. (2000). Infectious causation of disease: an evolutionary perspective, Perspectives in Biology and Medicine, 43, 406-448.

Okonofu, F.E. and H. Obi. (2009). Specialized Versus Conventional Treatment of infertility in Africa: Time for a Pragmatic Approach, African Journal of Reproductive Health, 13, 9-11.

http://www.ajrh.info/vol13_no1/13_1_editorial_english.php



O’Reilly, K.R. (1986). Sexual behaviour, perceptions of infertility and family planning in sub-Saharan Africa, African Journal of Sexually Transmitted Diseases, 2, 47-49.

Unz, R. (2013). “Gay gene” vs. “gay germ”, April 16, The American Conservative,

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/gay-gene-vs-gay-germ/