logo
Did Horses Trigger The 1918 Flu Pandemic?

Did Horses Trigger The 1918 Flu Pandemic?

Forbes16-05-2025

NEWMARKET, ENGLAND - FEBRUARY 11: Veterinary Clinician Jeremy Allen swabs a Polo Pony to test for ... More Equine Influenza on February 11, 2019 in Newmarket, England. The sample will be sent to the 'Animal Health Trust', whose testing lab first confirmed the recent outbreak.. The NEH is the largest and most state-of-the-art equine hospital in Europe. The clinic focuses on personalised high quality veterinary care and emergency care for horses from all over the world. The facility offers a specialised 24-hour emergency service by a highly skilled team of equine veterinary specialists, nurses, interns and yard staff, offering a range of services including MRI scans, x-ray and arthroscopic surgery. Horse racing across the UK continues to be suspended due to an outbreak of equine influenza. 174 yards are being tested after cases of influenza were detected in a stables in Cheshire among already-vaccinated horses. Four more positive tests for equine influenza have also been returned in vaccinated thoroughbreds stables in Newmarket. This is the biggest shutdown in British racing since the foot and mouth outbreak in 2001. (Photo by)
The 1918 influenza pandemic remains the deadliest in modern history, killing tens of millions—and leaving scientists with enduring questions about where it began.
For decades, many researchers assumed the virus emerged in pigs. But when scientists sequenced the virus's genome in 2005, they found it was primarily avian in origin. One possibility was that the virus originated in birds, passed through pigs—where it adapted to mammalian cells—and then jumped to humans. However, more recent evidence has cast doubt on this so-called 'mixing vessel' hypothesis. Studies show that avian-to-swine transmission is rare, that pigs and humans have similar distributions of sialic acid receptors in their respiratory tracts to which influenza viruses bind, and that the 1918 virus's genome shows little sign of prolonged adaptation in pigs.
Based on this, scientists Martha Nelson and Michael Worobey concluded that seven avian genes in the 1918 virus were probably transmitted from birds to humans at the start of the pandemic, and from humans to swine once the pandemic was widespread in humans.
View of victims of the Spanish flu cases as they lie in beads at a barracks hospital on the campus ... More of Colorado Agricultural College, Fort Collins, Colorado, 1918. (Photo by American Unofficial Collection of World War I Photographs/PhotoQuest/Getty Images)
Now a new hypothesis, put forth by medical historian Martin Furmanski and virologist Pablo Murcia published in the Journal of Infectious Diseases, suggests a different intermediate host was spreading a prepandemic avian-origin virus before 1918: the horse.
The idea is biologically plausible and historically grounded—and it reframes how we think about the origin of the 1918 pandemic.
Influenza viruses infect hosts by binding to sialic acid receptors in the respiratory tract. Avian viruses preferentially bind to α2,3-linked receptors, while human viruses target α2,6-linked receptors. Most mammals express one type or the other, but some—including pigs and horses—express both. This dual susceptibility has led scientists to propose that these species may act as 'bridge hosts,' enabling avian and human viruses to co-infect the same cells and exchange gene segments through reassortment. They may also provide an environment in which avian viruses can acquire additional mutations that affect processes besides receptor binding enhancing replication, cell entry, and transmission in mammals.
While pigs have long been considered for this role (although, as noted above, that notion was challenged by Nelson and Worobey), horses have only recently received attention. But a growing body of evidence shows that horses exhibit both α2,3 and α2,6 sialic acids. Moreover, all three known equine influenza viruses are believed to have derived from avian strains.
The new hypothesis draws on more than just receptor biology. It also points to an overlooked historical episode: a large epizootic of equine influenza that began in North America in 1915. Reports at the time described unusually severe respiratory illness and pneumonia among horses—a feature also seen in human cases during the 1918 pandemic.
BOSTON - MARCH 18: Police horse Sweetie Don't first came into the department in 1913. He helped keep ... More order in the Haymarket district. He was being retired as he had caught a "horse flu" which caused him to become lame. He spent the rest of his days on a rest farm. horsesgetty (The Boston Globe via Getty Images)
The timing is notable. Between 1914 and 1918, World War I drove one of the largest mobilizations of horses in U.S. history. The U.S. Army purchased over 300,000 horses and mules after joining the war effort, in addition to 68,000 used during the 1916 Mexican Punitive Expedition. Furmanski and Murcia provide evidence that over two million animals were mobilized by the military between 1914 and 1918, the majority of which were eventually exported to Europe.
These animals were housed in crowded stables, transported in train cars across the country, and shipped overseas. Such conditions created ample opportunity for viruses to spread, mutate, and reassort. Ultimately, at some point seven segments from an avian H7N1 virus combined with an H1 hemagglutinin gene that was already adapted to humans, producing the 1918 pandemic virus.
Reconstructions of 1918 influenza viruses support the idea of gradual adaptation to humans. As reviewed in a forthcoming paper in the journal Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews, an early strain isolated in New York has been found to bind both avian-type (α2,3-linked) and human-type (α2,6-linked) sialic acid receptors and failed to transmit efficiently in ferrets—a standard model for human infection. Such a virus might have been well adapted to horses. By contrast, a later strain from South Carolina primarily binds to human-type receptors and transmits readily via aerosols, suggesting that it had by then acquired adaptations permitting human-to-human spread.
Camp Funston in Kansas is often cited as the site of the first well-documented outbreak of 1918 flu in humans. It was also a major staging ground for military horses. Tetanus was common, and millions of doses of antitoxin serum were produced using horses—another point of close contact between humans and equids during wartime.
1918 or 1919 - Camp Funston, interior (Photo by: HUM Images/Universal Images Group via Getty Images)
Conclusive evidence is still lacking; confirming past infections or reassortment events would require archived horse tissue or serum from the 1910s. But taken together, the historical and biological clues offer a compelling case.
Understanding how pandemic viruses emerge is key to anticipating future outbreaks. If horses can serve as a bridge between avian and human influenza viruses, they warrant closer surveillance—particularly where they are kept near poultry or people. The recent spread of H5N1 among dairy cattle, another unexpected mammalian host, underscores how little we may yet understand about the pathways influenza can take.
Influenza pandemics are shaped by more than viral mutation. They emerge at the intersection of biology, human behavior, and historical circumstance. In 1918, that intersection may well have been in a horse stable.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

KKR Raises Offer for Assura, Valuing Landlord at £1.7 Billion
KKR Raises Offer for Assura, Valuing Landlord at £1.7 Billion

Bloomberg

time42 minutes ago

  • Bloomberg

KKR Raises Offer for Assura, Valuing Landlord at £1.7 Billion

A consortium led by KKR & Co has increased its bid in a takeover battle for Assura Plc, valuing the UK healthcare landlord at £1.7 billion ($2.3 billion). KKR and its co-bidder, Stonepeak Partners LP, sweetened their cash offer to an implied total value of 52.1 pence for each Assura share, inclusive of declared dividends, according to a statement on Wednesday. That compares with an implied total value of 51.7 pence put forward by rival Primary Health Properties Plc earlier.

New care company helping elderly people live at home for longer
New care company helping elderly people live at home for longer

Yahoo

time2 hours ago

  • Yahoo

New care company helping elderly people live at home for longer

A new care company hopes to help elderly people retain their independence by giving them the option of living at home for longer. Home Instead South Norfolk and East Suffolk was set up by Mark Rainbird-Bryant from Norwich to provide quality care at people's homes if they require support. He was inspired to start the business after his grandmother passed away a few years ago, spending her final days in a care home. Mark said he and his family would have preferred for her to stay at home - "the place she loved most". Mark Rainbird-Bryant has set up Home Instead South Norfolk and East Suffolk to help people live at home for longer (Image: Supplied) 'I know what it's like to want the best for your loved one but not having the option for them to stay at home," he said. "Having grown up in Norfolk, I have a strong affiliation with the local area and I'm keen to give something back. 'It's not enough to simply offer care. The care that we offer involves minimum one hour visits to ensure that they are thorough. "Not only that, we match care professionals to clients based on shared interests to help the two bond and form a friendship. "The care plan is tailored to meet the needs of the specific person." Based in Snetterton, Home Instead South Norfolk and East Suffolk offers a range of care, including companionship, personal care such as help with dressing and bathing, and specialist dementia support - all at the person's home. "I'm keen to raise awareness of key issues facing older people, particularly dementia, to help create a community that is more understanding and one where people know how to support ageing adults," Mark added. "I look forward to meeting lots of people at the various events I have lined up.' He is now building a team of care professionals and is currently recruiting for various care roles. Members of staff will receive training to provide care and support for people locally.

How the maternity system is failing self-employed women
How the maternity system is failing self-employed women

Yahoo

time2 hours ago

  • Yahoo

How the maternity system is failing self-employed women

Pregnancy isn't an easy ride. Exhaustion and sickness aside, expectant parents often find themselves doing mental gymnastics to work out how, or if, they'll afford to take maternity leave. For many, the financial stress and anxiety can take away from the excitement of having a baby, especially for those who are self-employed. In the UK, self-employed individuals receiving Maternity Allowance can get between £27 and £187.18 per week – less than half the amount typically needed to maintain a basic standard of living. Amid the cost of living crisis, record levels of inflation, high interest rates, rising costs of essentials and a fall in real-terms pay and benefits, new families are facing a perfect storm. Because of this, new mothers are going without meals. Many are forced to return to work earlier than planned, putting their mental and physical health at risk. Read more: Why the pressure to be liked at work is holding women back Maternity leave is far from "time off" from work. It's a critical period for recovery after pregnancy and birth. It allows parents to bond with their newborns, adjust to night feeds, cope with the hormonal and physical changes and navigate the many, complex emotional and social transitions that come with new parenthood. Yet for those who are self-employed or don't meet rigid eligibility criteria, this vital period comes with little to no financial support. UK mums have some of the lowest rates of maternity pay in Europe. Despite inflationary increases in April 2023, the basic rate of benefits remains close to destitution. For women who do not meet the strict eligibility criteria – often due to factors beyond their control – there is no maternity pay at all. Like statutory maternity pay for employees, maternity allowance is worth £187.18 a week. But one major difference is that the maternity allowance isn't topped up to 90 percent of earnings for the first six weeks. 'Also if a maternity allowance recipient is claiming universal credit, universal credit will treat the maternity allowance as unearned income and claw it back pound-for-pound, so effectively the claimant is no better off,' says Rhian Beynon, senior public affairs and communications officer at Maternity Action. 'By contrast, universal credit treats statutory maternity allowance as earned income.' Many new mums are forced to rely on their partner's income, which automatically excludes single parents. 'The whole maternity pay system is based on the assumption that a woman will have been employed and will be supported by another higher breadwinner partner,' says Beynon. Read more: Five soft skills that can help you get hired or promoted 'This is hopelessly out of kilter with the reality that many women are often the main or higher earner in their household, and/or are self-employed. The majority of women (97 percent) reported to our recent survey that they end up worrying about money on maternity leave and that this affects their health and wellbeing.' Self-employed women also face stricter limitations around maternity leave, particularly when it comes to KIT (keeping in touch) days. If you're receiving statutory maternity pay from an employer, you're allowed to carry on with any amount of self-employed work. However, you're limited to just 10 KIT days with that employer. For those receiving maternity allowance, the restrictions are tighter. You can only work up to 10 days in total, whether for an employer or in your self-employed role, without affecting your payments. These KIT days are designed to help women stay connected to their work, but according to research by IPSE, 25% of self-employed mothers said they needed more than 10 KIT days to sustain their business. If you exceed the 10-day limit, your maternity allowance will be stopped – and you'll lose payments for each additional day you work. And for many self-employed women, the fear of losing business leads them to head back to work earlier than they would like. Read more: How employers can prevent mental health crises at work 'I had a difficult pregnancy and birth but I ended up heading back to work after two months because I was worried I'd lose clients,' says Jemma*, a self-employed music teacher. 'Maternity allowance was barely enough to live on, and I never spend beyond my means. I ended up dealing with birth trauma, while trying to keep on teaching and looking after my son – it was impossible.' Olga Fitzroy, founder of Parental Pay Equality, says that self-employed parents continue to be overlooked due to a fundamental lack of understanding among MPs and policymakers. 'I had the experience of discussing the impact of a period away from a self-employed business for a self-employed mother with officials at the Department for Business, and there seemed to be surprise at the fact that shutting a business for a year might negatively impact it,' she says. Fitzroy points out that the structure of the civil service, and the backgrounds of many MPs, contributes to this disconnect. 'The civil service is clearly very different from the gig economy, and very few MPs come from self-employment. This may have an impact on their understanding of what life is like for self-employed people.' A long-delayed government review into parental leave is due to begin this summer, but so far there's been no commitment to addressing the specific needs of self-employed parents. Fitzroy notes that while a separate review into single worker status may offer limited improvements, it's unlikely to result in a one-size-fits-all solution. 'We need a tailored system that recognises the realities of self-employment and ensures self-employed parents aren't left behind.' Until the government recognises the unique challenges faced by self-employed families, maternity pay will remain unequal – and for many, unsustainable. Read more: Five questions you shouldn't be asked in a job interview How to manage 'time blindness' at work if you have ADHD Can body doubling make us more productive at work?Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store