The highly pathogenic, tick-borne novel bunyavirus can lead to thrombocytopenia syndrome. Photo / 123RF
A deadly virus has re-emerged in China, infecting more than 60 people and killing seven.
The highly pathogenic, tick-borne novel bunyavirus can lead to thrombocytopenia syndrome.
It causes a viral haemorrhagic fever and has re-emerged in rural areas of China.
CNA reports that a 65-year-old tea farmer in China's Jiangsu province recently fell ill with a fever of 40C and a repetitive cough.
Beijing-backed Global Times reported 37 people had been diagnosed with thrombocytopenia in the Jiangsu province.
Experts now believe the virus can be transmitted from person to person.
People can infect others via blood, the respiratory tract and wounds.
The virus can also spread to people via infected animals.
Most people are infected from tick bites.
Sheng Jifang, an expert on the novel bunya virus, told the Global Times a patient who had died three years ago later infected 16 people that had contact with the patient's body.
One of those infected people later died.
The patient had bleeding because of severe infection, he said.
Family members of infected patients and medical staff have been warned to take necessary preventive and protective measures.
The Taiwan Centers for Disease Control says the novel bunyavirus has a fatality rate of about 10 per cent.
Common symptoms of the virus include fever, fatigue, nausea, abdominal pain, and decreased appetite.
It can lead to multiple organ failure and death.
The virus was first discovered in China's central Henan and eastern Anhui provinces in 2009.
The disease has since spread to Taiwan, with a man in his 70s developing a fever and experiencing severe vomiting after contracting the virus last year.
He had no recent history of international travel but often went walking in the mountains.
There is no known vaccine or medications that can target the virus.
The re-emergence of the novel bunyavirus comes after the novel coronavirus was discovered in China late last year.
NY Times: Was investing in celebrity-fuelled events more ostentatious than effective?