Don’t panic. That’s the emphatic message coming from researchers who have discovered a new virus in human blood. Though it’s unclear how common the pathogen is, there’s no evidence that it has caused anyone harm, and half of those infected appear to have cleared it. 
 
 The newfound virus’s genetic sequence shows that it has similarities to hepatitis C, which can cause serious liver damage, and to the harmless—and even helpful—human pegivirus (formerly dubbed hepatitis G). Amit Kapoor, a virologist at Columbia University led the team that identified the new virus—and which has named it human hepegivirus 1, or HHpgV-1—notes that many people understand that humans coexist with myriad bacteria that are not dangerous, but they don’t realize the same holds true for some viruses. 
 
 The team made the discovery thanks to new, sophisticated techniques for sequencing fragments of RNA and DNA. As part of a search for novel human viruses, the group scoured blood samples from a cohort of 46 people that were collected before and after they received a blood transfusion between 1974 and 1980. Today, stricter policies determine who can donate blood and the blood itself is screened more rigorously. “I thought if I want to know whatever is circulating and unknown these are the best samples,” Kapoor says. 
 
 Using what’s known as “deep sequencing” techniques, Kapoor’s team fished for nucleic acid sequences (the building blocks of DNA) of known viruses, and found two people who posttransfusion had what looked like a novel flavivirus, the family that includes hepatitis C and human pegivirus. Based on later blood samples that were analyzed, both of these people subsequently cleared the virus, the team reports online today in mBio. Kapoor and his colleagues then looked at 70 more people from that cohort but did not find the HHpgV-1 sequence again. 
 
 An analysis of a different batch of stored blood samples, from 106 people who had received many blood products because they had hemophilia, found two more people who harbored HHpgV-1 sequences. These people had persistent infections, one of which lasted at least 5.4 years, but no evidence of a related disease. 
 
 The researchers have yet to isolate the virus itself or produce it in cell cultures, but viral hunters are convinced it exists. Although contamination frequently upends the supposed discovery of a new virus, HHpgV-1 looks real, says Michael Houghton, a virologist at the University of Alberta in Edmonton who helped identify the viral cause of hepatitis C. Yet Houghton stresses that many unknowns remain. “While this elegant and valuable work serves to emphasize the power of modern deep sequencing technology in identifying new viruses, the role of this new virus in liver and other diseases remains to be elucidated,” he wrote in an email. 
 
 Still, it is far too early for blood banks to take any action against HHpgV-1, says Michael Busch, an experimental pathologist who co-directs the Blood Systems Research Institute in San Francisco (an arm of nonprofit blood banks) and former member of a U.S. government advisory group about blood safety. “Does it cause trouble that would justify any response with blood safety? I don’t think we’re at that level.” Many blood products today, such as plasma, go through filtering and inactivation procedures that likely eliminate HHpgV-1, he notes. Moreover, there’s a chance the virus could even be helpful. Busch co-authored studies that show that HIV-infected people benefit from co-infection with hepegivirus, which makes up a portion of HHpgV-1’s genetic sequence. “There was clear evidence that it reduced the pathogenesis of HIV,” he says. 
 
 Kapoor says the main challenge now is to develop an antibody test to determine who is or was infected with HHpgV-1 in a larger population. Researchers then can compare the health of people with HHpgV-1 antibodies with control groups and assess whether any links to disease exist. 
 
 Almost every year, scientists identify a new virus in humans, Busch says, and some undoubtedly were spread through transfusions. In the same study that found HHpgV-1, Kapoor’s team found 10-fold more anelloviruses, unknown until 1997, in posttransfusion blood samples. Yet no studies have convincingly linked these viruses to disease. “Anelloviruses are probably the most common human virus,” notes virologist Eric Delwart of the University of California, San Francisco, who was a postdoctoral adviser to Kapoor. “They’re very understudied.” 
 
 Delwart, who says his lab has already discovered a sequence that looks like one from HHpgV-1 in a stored blood sample, predicts that as researchers find more diverse variants of the virus, they can begin to address the intriguing questions of its origin. “Where are these viruses coming from?” Delwart asks. “Are they recently in the human population or have they been around for a long time?” ||||| Scientists have found a new virus that can be transmitted by blood transfusions and other blood-based products. 
 
 It looks a little like the hepatitis C virus, which can cause permanent liver damage, and a little like the human pegivirus, which appears to be harmless, the team reports in the journal mBio. 
 
 They’ve named it human hepegivirus-1 (HHpgV-1). 
 
 “We have been able to find a new virus. It’s clearly transmitted as a result of human (blood) transfusion,” said infectious disease expert Dr. Ian Lipkin, who oversaw the study team at Columbia University. 
 
 “It is the first transfusion-associated virus that’s been described in a long time. We don’t know if it is going to be a significant cause of human hepatitis,” Lipkin told NBC News. 
 
 “It is the first transfusion-associated virus that’s been described in a long time." 
 
 But probably not, the researchers said. 
 
 “So far there is no need to be concerned,” said Amit Kapoor, an assistant professor at Columbia University who led the study. 
 
 “We really don’t know if there is ongoing transmission of this virus. It may be good for you.” 
 
 Lipkin agreed. 
 
 “I’m not really worried about this particular virus,” he said. “This is not SARS. This is not MERS. This is not HIV.” 
 
 To find it, the team sampled blood banked at the National Institutes of Health from 46 volunteers between 1974 and 1980. They found it in two samples. Both patients appear to have "cleared" the virus and there is no evidence it caused any disease. 
 
 All the volunteers got blood products to treat hemophilia. The virus only showed up after they got transfusions. 
 
 “This is not SARS. This is not MERS. This is not HIV.” 
 
 Then they looked at samples from 106 people in another study, and found the virus in two more people. One appears to have been infected for as long as five years but both cleared the virus, too. 
 
 "We just don't know how many viruses are transmitted through the blood supply. There are so many viruses out there, and they need to be characterized in order to ensure that transfusions are safe," Kapoor said. 
 
 Hemophilia was once only treated with blood products taken from people. Now it's often treated with genetically engineered products, which do not carry infectious agents. 
 
 Now that the genetic sequence of this new virus is published, Lipkin said, other scientists can start looking for it. 
 
 “More than 30 million blood components are transfused annually in the United States alone. Surveillance for infectious agents in the blood supply is key to ensuring the safety of this critical resource for medicine and public health,” the researchers wrote. 
 
 In the same issue of mBio, another team led by Lipkin reports they found a new virus related to hepatitis A virus in seals. It doesn’t seem to make the seals sick but it’s a possible ancestor of hepatitis A, they wrote. 
 
 “This finding suggests that the diversity and evolutionary history of these viruses might be far greater than previously thought and may provide insight into the origin and pathogenicity of hepatitis A virus,” they wrote. 
 
 They’ve named it phopivirus. ||||| Breaking News Emails Get breaking news alerts and special reports. The news and stories that matter, delivered weekday mornings. 
 
 / Updated By Maggie Fox 
 
 The Food and Drug Administration has formally proposed letting gay and bisexual men donate blood, so long as they’ve abstained from sex for a year. 
 
 The recommendation changes the current guidance, which is that any man who have ever had sex with another man in his entire life should never be able to donate blood. It’s a policy that has enraged gay rights groups and that is virtually impossible to enforce. 
 
 "No transmissions of HIV, hepatitis B virus, or hepatitis C virus have been documented through U.S.-licensed plasma derived products in the past two decades," the FDA says in its recommendation. 
 
 The FDA also handed a victory to transgender people, saying donors may choose how to identify their sex. 
 
 The reason for banning donations by men who have sex with other men is simple: they are at much higher risk of becoming infected with HIV, the virus that causes AIDS, as well as other viruses such as hepatitis B and C. 
 
 "No transmissions of HIV, hepatitis B virus, or hepatitis C virus have been documented through U.S.-licensed plasma derived products in the past two decades." 
 
 “Since September 1985, FDA has recommended that blood establishments indefinitely defer male donors who have had sex with another male, even one time, since 1977, due to the strong clustering of AIDS illness in the MSM (men who have sex with men) community and the subsequent discovery of high rates of HIV infection in that population,” FDA says in its guidance. 
 
 Before 1985, people did become infected with HIV from blood transfusions. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimated in 2001 that more than 14,000 people were infected that way. 
 
 There are good blood tests that are now used to screen blood donations for HIV and many other viruses, such as hepatitis. The American Red Cross and America’s Blood Centers, which collect donations, say the lifetime ban is unnecessary. CDC says the risk of getting HIV from a transfusion is one in 1.5 million. 
 
 The tests don’t detect a very recent infection, however. To be safe, the FDA wants to stick with the one-year limit. The FDA first said it would change the guidance last December. 
 
 “We recommend that donors be provided donor education material before each donation explaining the risk of HIV transmission by blood and blood products, certain behaviors associated with the risk of HIV infection, and the signs and symptoms associated with HIV infection, so that donors can self-defer,” FDA says. 
 
 “The donor education material should be presented to donors in a manner they will understand, which may include oral, written, or multimedia formats. The donor education material should instruct the donor not to donate when a risk factor for HIV infection or signs or symptoms of HIV infection are present.” 
 
 FDA says other countries have allowed gay and bisexual men to donate blood with little problem. They include Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Hungary, Japan, Sweden and Britain. 
 
 About 7 percent of U.S. men report that they have ever had sex with another man and 4 percent of men have done so in the past five years. 
 
 FDA says other groups should still be asked not to donate blood, including prostitutes and injecting drug users. 
 
 “Recent data indicate that commercial sex work and injection drug use are behaviors that continue to place individuals both at a relatively high risk of HIV infection and at a relatively high risk of window period transmission of HIV,” FDA notes. “Window period” is the short period of time before a test can detect an infection in blood. 
 
 “This policy prevents men from donating life-saving blood based solely on their sexual orientation rather than actual risk to the blood supply.” 
 
 The Human Rights Campaign, which has pushed hard to allow gay and bisexual men to donate blood, is still critical of FDA’s new policy. 
 
 "While the new policy is a step in the right direction toward an ideal policy that reflects the best scientific research, it still falls far short of a fully acceptable solution because it continues to stigmatize gay and bisexual men,” said the group’s top policy official, David Stacy. “This policy prevents men from donating life-saving blood based solely on their sexual orientation rather than actual risk to the blood supply.” 
 
 FDA notes this is guidance and not any type of regulation. “Guidances describe the FDA’s current thinking on a topic and should be viewed only as recommendations, unless specific regulatory or statutory requirements are cited.” 
 
 The guidance also asks people not to donate blood if they’ve recently received a transfusion, and it asks women who have had recent sex with a bisexual or gay man to wait a year before donating.
– Scientists have discovered a new virus apparently transmitted through blood transfusions. Little else is known about human hepegivirus-1, or HHpgV-1, besides that it looks a bit like hepatitis C and the harmless and perhaps beneficial human pegivirus. "It is the first transfusion-associated virus that's been described in a long time," a researcher tells NBC News. He adds "we don't know if it is going to be a significant cause of human hepatitis," but scientists say it's unlikely. In fact, "it may be good for you." They first found the virus in blood samples from two volunteers, part of a study of 46, who received blood transfusions to treat hemophilia between 1974 and 1980. The virus only appeared after transfusions, but both patients cleared it and showed no sign of disease. Two more cases were found among 106 who'd received plasma, per mBio; both cleared the virus, though one was infected for five years. Even if the virus is harmful, researchers say there's no need to panic. "This is not SARS. This is not MERS. This is not HIV," says an expert. Whereas blood transfusions were once performed solely with human blood products, they now use genetically engineered products. Plus, blood is screened more carefully and stricter policies better control who donates blood compared to 25 years ago. "Does it cause trouble that would justify any response with blood safety? I don’t think we're at that level," a pathologist at the Blood Systems Research Institute tells Science. Scientists have yet to isolate the virus but say the next step is to develop an antibody test to find HHpgV-1 in a larger population. Afterward, experts can determine whether those with HHpgV-1 antibodies appear less healthy than those without the virus and look for links to disease. (A study suggests the seeds of Alzheimer's may pass through blood.)