'Trench fever' found in 2,000-year-old teeth of 34 Roman skeletons in Sicily

[Imperial Dave]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-9011115/Trench-fever-teeth-ancient-Romans-reveals-disease-began-2-000-years-ago.html

I know I will get grief off Tim for the source of the article......

[Erpingham]

One might ask, if the disease came into existence in 1915, why did they test ancient skeletons for it?  I would suggest it was first detected in 1915 and the subtle difference was lost on the journalist.  Also, bacteria is plural and to treat it as singular is grammatically embarassing for a national newspaper.  Finally, the First World War trench illustration is from the Second World War - those men are wearing battledress.  But other than that nit (or maybe louse) pick, another interesting article from the Mail

[Imperial Dave]

One might ask, if the disease came into existence in 1915, why did they test ancient skeletons for it?  I would suggest it was first detected in 1915 and the subtle difference was lost on the journalist.  Also, bacteria is plural and to treat it as singular is grammatically embarassing for a national newspaper.  Finally, the First World War trench illustration is from the Second World War - those men are wearing battledress.  But other than that nit (or maybe louse) pick, another interesting article from the Mail

They employ journalists?

[Swampster]

One might ask, if the disease came into existence in 1915, why did they test ancient skeletons for it?  I would suggest it was first detected in 1915 and the subtle difference was lost on the journalist.  Also, bacteria is plural and to treat it as singular is grammatically embarassing for a national newspaper.  Finally, the First World War trench illustration is from the Second World War - those men are wearing battledress.  But other than that nit (or maybe louse) pick, another interesting article from the Mail

Not only is, as you say, the pic from WW2, but to illustrate the damp conditions they pick a rather parched looking position.

I wonder whether Bartonella quintana had different symptoms in the past, perhaps changing through genetic drift.

[Nick Harbud]

Of course, many diseases associated with WW1 combat were prevalent before that time.  It should be remembered that WW1 was the first major war in which casualties from enemy action outnumbered those from disease.

I therefore find it unsurprising that soldiers from 2,000 years ago should succumb to tick/louse-borne diseases that were only positively identified less than 100 years ago.  I mean, if recorded at all, any deaths were probably noted as being the result of an ague or similar, non=specific ailment

[Imperial Dave]

or bad humour

[Duncan Head]

And it's still about -
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/dec/07/ww1-trench-fever-identified-in-former-homeless-man-in-canada

[Imperial Dave]

which doesnt surprise me Duncan...as the article says, it can crop up at refugee camps quite often for obvious reasons

[Erpingham]

It probably hung around infecting poor people for millennia but, as they were poor people, nobody really noticed.  Just one more case of chest problems, stroke and heart attack.

On a lighter note, nice to see a news paper that can put up a WWI photo and knows bacterium is the singular.

[Imperial Dave]

progress....lol