When Did Mycobacterium tuberculosis Infection First Occur in The New World?: An Important Question with Public Health Implications

The evolutionary history of infectious disease in the ancient Americas and the pathogenic consequences of European contact

“…To be sure, phylogenetic studies have confirmed that colonial activity over the past 500 years is likely responsible for the introduction of diseases like YF and P. falciparum malaria (Bryant et al, 2007;Chippaux & Chippaux, 2018;Emory University, 2021, slavevoyages.org;Li & Yang, 2017;Molina-Cruz & Barillas-Mury, 2014). Yet, in the case of TB, for example, it was assumed by scientists and historians alike that the extreme devastation of Indigenous populations at the time of colonization pointed to a lack of prior immunity to TB (Stead, 2001;Stead et al, 1995). The post-contact population collapses following TB, smallpox, and influenza epidemics were unquestionably horrific and devastating, often killing the majority of the Indigenous population of a given area (Lindo et al, 2016;Lindo et al, 2018).…”

“…Furthermore, research into Indigenous American populations has historically been ignored. Thus, the longstanding narrative of unidirectional pathogen introduction from European colonizers to the Americas remained unchallenged for many decades (Barbier & Wirth, 2016;Bollaert, 1864;Laxao, 2016;Majander et al, 2020;Pineda et al, 1998;Stead, 2001;Stead et al, 1995;Sutter, 2016;Wilbur & Buikstra, 2006).…”

“…The skewed portrayal of the Panama Canal project from Western perspectives illustrates why sources like missionary reports and colonial authorities are not reliable characterizations of infectious disease dynamics in the Americas (Laxao, 2016;Sutter, 2016). Similarly, the conventional narrative surrounding the European origin of TB, based on descriptions from colonial reports, has only recently been disproven by phylogenetic studies (Barbier & Wirth, 2016;Stead, 2001;Stead et al, 1995). This is not to say that diseases brought by colonial activity were not devastating to Indigenous Americans, but rather that more care must be taken not to conflate observations made by colonizers with conclusive evidence of evolutionary origins.…”

“…Until the end of the 20th century, the prevailing assumption was that M. tuberculosis was not present in pre-European contact America, and first came about in Eurasia as a zoonosis from M. bovis at the time of Neolithic cattle domestication (Barbier & Wirth, 2016;Wilbur & Buikstra, 2006). This assumption was based on the extreme devastation of Indigenous populations at the time of colonization-as recorded in missionary reports-which historians and archeologists F I G U R E 1 Map of the Americas showing the diseases discussed in this article, including those present pre-European contact (solid shading) and those first introduced by European colonization (arrows) (see Table S1 for list of references) assumed pointed to a lack of prior exposure, and therefore lack of immunity, to TB infection (Stead, 2001;Stead et al, 1995).…”

“…In studies of the Americas, where research into Indigenous ways of life and population ecology have historically been an afterthought, these new avenues of research have redefined many conventional hypotheses regarding the evolutionary relationships of human pathogens. Specifically, phylogenetic studies using data obtained from NGS techniques, in concert with paleopathological analysis of human remains, have often contradicted the written observational records made by colonial authorities (Barbier & Wirth, 2016;Breedlove & Arguin, 2015;Laxao, 2016;Stead, 2001;Stead et al, 1995;Sutter, 2016;Wilbur & Buikstra, 2006).…”