Here & Now

UW Researchers Work to Understand Novel Coronavirus

Frederica Freyberg:

In medical news, an update on the novel coronavirus outbreak and the status of Wisconsin cases. As of today, there remains just one positive test result in the state. That person has been recovering at home. 14 other cases pending for test outcomes have come back negative. This week UW-Madison announced scientists on campus will be at the leading edge of research to understand the new virus. A sample of the novel coronavirus being used by the researchers came from the UW hospital where the Dane County patient who tested positive was seen. Thomas Friedrich is a professor at the UW School of Veterinarian Medicine and part of that research team. He joins us now. Thanks for being here.

Thomas Friedrich:

Thank you for having me.

Frederica Freyberg:

I read and see that the disease is now being called COVID-19. Why is that?

Thomas Friedrich:

So the disease needs a name. The virus needs a name. COVID-19 stands for coronavirus disease, 2019. Just a few days ago, the global research community decided that that’s the name we should call it.

Frederica Freyberg:

I thought it was much more scientific than that.

Thomas Friedrich:

I’m afraid that’s all there is to it.

Frederica Freyberg:

In your lab, what in particular are you looking to find out about this?

Thomas Friedrich:

We’d like to know why these sort of events happen. About 75% of major human infectious diseases according to one estimate, come originally from animals, like this virus is thought to do, but there are millions of viruses and parasites and bacteria infecting animals that never become major human diseases. So we like to understand when we see a new example of this how it came to be.

Frederica Freyberg:

And what is the end goal then of that research?

Thomas Friedrich:

So the end goal is to understand how viruses evolve and the pathways they need to take to get from animals to humans and then become something that can be transmitted from one human to another. They have to overcome a lot of evolutionary barriers to do that and I think that the more examples we have of pathogens that do this, the better we can define what those barriers are and how they overcome them and then we can figure out hopefully how to stop this from happening.

Frederica Freyberg:

How well-poised is UW-Madison to really crack this case for the rest of the world on this and other kind of emerging illnesses?

Thomas Friedrich:

I think it’s important to underscore that this is truly a global effort, that there are so many pieces to the puzzle that no one team is likely going to be able to crack the case for everyone. So I think we all are trying to contribute in the way that we can. One of the main things that the group I’m working with is trying to do is get researchers to be more open about the data that they are generating. So in a time like this, it’s difficult to know even the most basic things about the biology of a new virus and the decisions that are made in laboratories around the world as we start to study these viruses will affect how well and how quickly we can have answers to important questions about how the virus grows and what cells it infects and how it’s transmitted and so forth. And one of the most important things I think is that early on there may be failures in research. So we may try something in our lab and it doesn’t work. And there’s really traditionally not a good mechanism to communicate that to the outside world. Or if we find something and it does work, there’s not a good way to make that information available rapidly. So we’re trying to share our data as quickly as we get it so other groups around the world can either build on our successes or learn from our mistakes.

Frederica Freyberg:

Is it true that other researchers, scientists across the world, perhaps aren’t being as open as your team would like to see?

Thomas Friedrich:

I think that people are naturally cautious. So, research is a human enterprise and like any other human enterprise, sometimes we make mistakes. Sometimes we may jump to conclusions based on a few initial findings and those don’t pan out. And so I think people are wary, especially in a very politically charged situation where there’s a lot of concern and worry that if they interpret their first few findings incorrectly, that that may unnecessarily worry someone. Or that it may unnecessarily calm things. And so I understand the concern. But I think the need to rapidly stand up a research enterprise of this size makes it important that we are transparent.

Frederica Freyberg:

All right. We need to leave it there. Dr. Friedrich, thanks very much.

Thomas Friedrich:

Ok. Thank you.