Cited by 8Prion Diseases and Protein MisfoldingLanguage and cultural evolutionPacific and Southeast Asian Studies

Cultural factors that affected the spatial and temporal epidemiology of kuru

Open access
Whitfield, J. T., Pako, W. H., Collinge, J., Alpers, M. P.·2017·Royal Society Open Science

Abstract

Kuru is a prion disease which became epidemic among the Fore and surrounding linguistic groups in Papua New Guinea, peaking in the late 1950s. It was transmitted during the transumption (endocannibalism) of dead family members at mortuary feasts. In this study, we aimed to explain the historical spread and the changing epidemiological patterns of kuru by analysing factors that affected its transmission. We also examined what cultural group principally determined a family's behaviour during mortuary rituals. Our investigations showed that differences in mortuary practices were responsible for the initial pattern of the spread of kuru and the ultimate shape of the epidemic, and for subsequent spatio-temporal differences in the epidemiology of kuru. Before transumption stopped altogether, the South Fore continued to eat the bodies of those who had died of kuru, whereas other linguistic groups, sooner or later, stopped doing so. The linguistic group was the primary cultural group that determined behaviour but at linguistic boundaries the neighbouring group's cultural practices were often adopted. The epidemiological changes were not explained by genetic differences, but genetic studies led to an understanding of genetic susceptibility to kuru and the selection pressure imposed by kuru, and provided new insights into human history and evolution.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1098/rsos.160789

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Authors
Whitfield, J. T., Pako, W. H., Collinge, J., & Alpers, M. P.
Affiliations
  • MRC Prion Unit (GB)
  • Papua New Guinea Institute of Medical Research (PG)
  • Curtin University (AU)
Corresponding author
Whitfield, J. T.
Venue
Royal Society Open Science
Published
2017-01
Volume
4
Issue
1
Pages
160789
ISSN
2054-5703 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2574522376
Cited by
8
References
2
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 1 · 2017: 1
FWCI
0.45
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Royal Society Open Science (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
  • eSpace (Curtin University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
Medical Research Council (MC-A750-5QV20)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Prion Diseases and Protein Misfolding
  • Social Sciences › Cultural Studies › Language and cultural evolution
  • Social Sciences › Geography, Planning and Development › Pacific and Southeast Asian Studies
Keywords
kuru, prion disease, funerary practices, Fore people, cultural transmission, epidemic spread, language groups, cultural diffusion, genetic susceptibility, selection pressure, human evolution, Papua New Guinea

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review