IMM250H1 (Immunity and Infection): Science & Society Paper – Winter 2023
IMM250H1 Winter 2023
Immunity and Infection
Science & Society Paper (Winter 2023)
Topic: “Monkeypox Virus: The New Old Outbreak?”

Living through the COVID-19 pandemic over the past couple of years has well acquainted even the least
scientifically inclined individual as to what makes an outbreak.

In April 2022, the monkeypox virus (MPXV) entered the international stage. Before this time, monkeypox
(MPX) was rarely seen outside its endemic regions of west and central Africa. Animal reservoirs in endemic
areas primarily include small rodents, and viral transmission to humans and non-human primates usually
occurs by direct contact with blood, bodily fluids, or lesions of infected animals. Human-to-human transmission
occurs from close contact with respiratory secretions, skin lesions of an infected person, or recently
contaminated objects. The usual mild symptoms of MPX resolve in a self-limiting way within a month in
immunocompetent people. In vulnerable populations, including children, the elderly, pregnant women, and
immunocompromised individuals, the disease can be more severe or even deadly.

Despite this general mild disease severity, the recent emergence of MPX in non-endemic regions has become
a cause for global concern. Currently, according to the World Health Organization, there are just under 50,000
cases of MPX in over 90 countries worldwide. Interestingly, being a zoonotic disease, no animal reservoir for
MPXV has yet been identified in non-endemic regions, and incidence does not appear to be linked with travel
history to endemic regions. By the time MPX was declared a worldwide public health concern, inter-human
transmission chains may have already become established, so tracking down the primary source of the 2022
outbreak could be impossible. However, a pattern that has emerged is that MPX appears to overwhelmingly
occur in one specific demographic: men who have sex with men (MSM).

Regardless of everything we do not know about MPX in non-endemic regions, we do know that the current
outbreak will continue to grow if the spread of disease in those most at risk is not limited. To accomplish this,
what needs to be done in terms of education (especially without stigmatization of MSM communities),
research, and treatment? Can lessons from the COVID-19 pandemic be applied to curb the spread of MPX?

Format: 5-6 pages long (max 1800 words); double-spaced; 1-inch margins; 12 pt Times. Your paper can refer
to any assigned course content (required/recommended readings (e.g., papers, textbook), references provided
on slides) or additional references you find on your own. Please do not reference lecture slides. We require a
reference list and in-text citations in Vancouver style (see more at http://advice.writing.utoronto.ca/using-
sources/documentation/).

Assignment Content

The assignment can be approached in several ways, including (but not limited to):
1. Focus on the clinical manifestations and pathogenesis of MPX. What is known about the origins of
the virus that causes this neglected zoonotic disease and how does MPXV relate to other “pox” viruses,
such as smallpox? Where is it endemic and are there any differences in the virus that caused the
current outbreak in non-endemic regions? You should include a discussion of how the disease
progresses in general and high-risk populations and what that might mean in terms of diagnosis,
treatment, and spread prevention.
2. Focus on current human-to-human transmission chains in non-endemic regions. What is it about
MPXV that might make it more transmissible in non-endemic regions? We know that MSM communities
are more likely to become infected; how do we help control the spread of MPX in these communities
and protect high risk individuals without generating unwarranted stigma and fear in the general public
(akin to the HIV/ AIDS epidemic in the 1980s)?
IMM250H1 (Immunity and Infection): Science & Society Paper – Winter 2023
3. Focus on epidemiological factors determining MPX occurrence rates, its distribution and control of
spread in endemic compared to non-endemic regions. Do historical trends match what we are currently
seeing? Discuss the factors that might be contributing to changes in the epidemiology of MPX.
4. Focus on the treatment and prevention of MPX. We know symptoms are generally mild and self-
resolving in most people but what are the available therapies for individuals who develop severe
disease? What can be done to protect people from infection in the first place? Does an MPX vaccine
exist, or can we leverage our knowledge of mRNA vaccine technology developed against COVID-19 to
MPX?
5. A ‘holistic approach’ where any combination of 2 to 3 of the above points are all explored in some
depth, as per word limits.

— Your paper will be assessed using the criteria indicated in the rubric on the next page —


IMM250H1 (Immunity and Infection): Science & Society Paper – Winter 2023
Excellent
(100%)
Good
(85%)
Average
(70%)
Low
(40%)
Scientific Content (50%)
Introduction & Description of Topic Background

Can include (see guidelines above):

1. Clinical manifestation and pathogenesis of MPX;
2. MPX human-to-human transmission chains;
3. Epidemiological factors influencing spread and control of
MPX;
4. Treatment and prevention of MPX;
5. “Holistic approach”, meaning you describe MPX in more
general terms, exploring a few or all points 1 to 4.

Challenges
Identification, discussion, and analysis of difficulties
associated with the chosen topic. Ideally takes a
multidisciplinary perspective, including (but not limited to)
consideration of: issues with respect to MPX long being
considered a neglected disease in endemic African
countries versus greater concern for the current outbreak in
non-endemic European and North American countries;
societal stigma around disease spread in MSM
communities; the need for/access to drug treatments and
effective vaccines.

Hopes
A consideration of the outlook and prospects for
understanding emerging infectious diseases and how to
combat their spread in our globalized world, as well as
steering current research in these directions.
Scientific topic is clearly
stated, provocative,
concise and
appropriately focused.
Information is very
organized, and main
points connect well to
each other and the topic.
The argument is built
carefully.
Scientific topic is clearly
stated but focus could have
been sharper. Information is
organized, and main points
connect with one another
and the topic most of the
time. The argument builds
appropriately focused.
Information is organized, but
main points do not always lead
into each other, relate to the
topic or help to build the
argument.
Scientific topic is not
stated or appropriately
focused. The information
appears to be
disorganized and some
points do not connect well
together, nor with the
topic.
Note: The descriptions indicated for scientific content are a guide; the emphasis of your paper is completely up to you.
Tone and Style (20%)
A narrative style is established (e.g. general information
essay, testimonial report, case study, questions and
answers, timeline approach). The writing should consider
both science and non-science readership with respect to
language and terminology used, clarity of ideas presented
and reader engagement.

Conclusion
Conclusion ‘pulls together’ main ideas and unresolved
issues.
Product is highly focused
with interesting elements
in the writing and design,
which perpetuate reader
to continue. Reader is
involved. The paper has
a clarity that leaves no
questions in the reader's
mind. Conclusion
stylishly and subtly
culminates by further
developing main idea;
effective specificity;
leaves a positive
impression on the
reader.
Possesses a quality that
keeps the reader reading—
has focus, interest, design
elements that move the
reader forward. Paper has a
clarity that leaves few
surface questions in the
reader's mind. Conclusion
returns to main ideas and
summarizes these points
clearly; some specificity;
solid sense of finality.

Lacks the ability to keep the
reader reading; design and
focus are uninteresting and/or
confusing. Reader is
disengaged. Paper leaves
several surface questions in
the reader's mind. Effective
conclusion; summarizes
previously stated materials; at
least briefly returns to main
ideas.
Lacks ability to hold
reader interest; fails to
present the content in an
interesting or captivating
way. Reader does not
wish to continue reading.
Writer seems uninterested
in the work.
Paper is unclear because
of significant and
unintentional gaps or
contradictions in logic,
point of view, etc. Fails to
conclude; repeats
previously stated
information; adds nothing
new in many words.


IMM250H1 (Immunity and Infection): Science & Society Paper – Winter 2023


Excellent
(100%)
Good
(85%)
Average
(70%)
Low
(40%)
Originality/Creativity (10%)
Regardless of the other merits of the work, there may be
positive qualities that are notable, such as:
The title (it should not use “Science and Society Assignment
(or Paper)” or the title used to describe the assignment,
“Monkeypox Virus: The New Old Outbreak?”; a creative
approach to the topic and “story” is taken.


Captures reader's
attention with title, first
interesting sentence,
paragraph, or line; reader
cannot help but continue
reading. Impresses the
reader from beginning to
end through original and
interesting use of ideas,
language, dialogue,
imagery, insight, etc.
Captures reader's attention
with title, first sentence,
paragraph, or line, and
draws reader into the rest of
paper. Interests the reader
most of the way with some
original and interesting use
of ideas, language, imagery,
etc.
Title, first sentence, paragraph,
or line lacks the ability to draw
the reader into the paper;
reader may not keep reading.
Offers little originality in ideas,
language, imagery, etc.
Reader may lose interest.
Overall, lacks interest for
the reader but also
contains a cliché title.
Ideas/imagery lack
originality or are absent.
Language is not engaging.
Reader sees the paper as
“spinning its wheels” – not
developing anything as it
goes.
Use of Sources and Accuracy of Information (20%)
The author may present opinions or may remain neutral with
respect to the topic, but the following is expected:
An appropriate number of sources have been consulted and
referenced (four references minimum).
There is a balance between academic sources (reviews or
primary research papers) and non-academic sources.
Relevant material from sources has been selected and
incorporated to support the story in the author’s own words.
Moderate use of quotes (maximum three short sentences) is
allowed but information is primarily summarized in the
author’s own words.
Accuracy of presented information is expected.

An appropriate number
of both academic and
non-academic sources
are included and are
smoothly incorporated to
clearly support major
ideas. Scientifically
accurate and topic is
covered in detail.


An appropriate number of
both academic and non-
academic sources are
included, and are connected
to major ideas. Scientific
content is thorough and
explains the topic well.

An appropriate number of
sources are included, although
not all are connected to major
ideas. Some imbalance in the
types of sources being used
(mostly academic or mostly
non-academic). Scientific
details are minimal and/or
inaccurate and topic is only
covered broadly.

Not enough sources are
consulted. Imbalance in
the types of sources being
used (only academic or
only non-academic), and
sources are not in line
with major ideas
presented. Scientific
information is incorrect,
minimal and extremely
broad.