Live data from Hacker News

New coronavirus can spread between humans, but started in a wildlife market

nationalgeographic.com

241–250 of 350 posts

Re: New coronavirus can spread between humans, but started in a wildlife market

#241
post #231
post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Eating bats is not an inherently Chinese thing to do. This is a case of some people in China who happen to eat bats. > It’s actually more offensive to suggest it is than to defend the practice as “cultural”. It's worse to read into a statement and reveal your own biases. I never said it was "inherently Chinese." Different cultures eat different foods. Shaming the choice to eat a food is a dark pattern. Reading into…

>Shaming the choice to eat a food is a dark pattern. It shouldn't be. Food is a very topical, superficial aspect of culture and the average person has more than enough choice in what they eat. If eating bats is causing serious pandemics, then I'm going to shame eating bats. If shark fin soup is damaging the ecology, then I'm going to shame shark fin soup. If high-sugar diets are resulting in massive health problems,…

Do you eat beef, or any mass-farmed meats? Crops like almonds or tomatoes? The collection eating of beef does a lot of ecological damage through the destruction of natural habitats for grazing space and cattle feed, as well as the emission of methane into the atmosphere.

Do you need to be shamed? Perhaps you would like to shame me?

Re: New coronavirus can spread between humans, but started in a wildlife market

#242
post #219
post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Eating bats is not an inherently Chinese thing to do. This is a case of some people in China who happen to eat bats. > It’s actually more offensive to suggest it is than to defend the practice as “cultural”. It's worse to read into a statement and reveal your own biases. I never said it was "inherently Chinese." Different cultures eat different foods. Shaming the choice to eat a food is a dark pattern. Reading into…

This is a pot calling the kettle black. Someone claimed it was unclear the bat was for human consumption, then someone posted a link of someone Chinese eating a bat, and then you inferred some racist undertone from a comment that was nothing more than a link to the video.

> Someone claimed it was unclear the bat was for human consumption,

This is you failing to read. The claim was that there was a link between bats being eaten and the disease, which has not been demonstrated. Is it plausible? Sure. It is "suggested" (as was claimed) or "linked" (as was also claimed)? No, that's just speculation.

Re: New coronavirus can spread between humans, but started in a wildlife market

#243
post #21

From what I've read it came from bats. Most probably bats being eaten.[1] Bats have been the source of at least 4 pandemics. It's interesting to note that current coronavirus spreading in China and the SARS outbreak of 2003 have two things in common: Both are from the coronavirus family, and both were passed from animals to humans in a wet market.[2] I tried to put together a page for coronavirus in China here where…

You might like this:

https://gisanddata.maps.arcgis.com/apps/opsdashboard/index.h...

https://i.imgur.com/FUwsbBM.png

Re: New coronavirus can spread between humans, but started in a wildlife market

#244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Vice article that is cited by sdiw doesn't mention that the virus came from "bats being eaten.[1]" The article does state "new report points to the original animal source: bats" but nothing about bats being eaten. Maybe I missed something, please let me know. :) The National Geographic article states the following: > "[T]he highest prevalence of coronaviruses tend to be extruded by animals through feces, or guano…

Could be even simpler? Someone is going out and killing the bats right? They are physically handling dead bats in bulk, why can’t that be enough?

> Could be even simpler? Someone is going out and killing the bats right? They are physically handling dead bats in bulk, why can’t that be enough?

Because the specific claim was "most probably bats being eaten[1]" (not found in citation). The commenter above took an article which claims that the virus is linked to those found in bats, to "most probably" being caused by bats being eaten.

That is the speculation/claim that is under dispute.

Re: New coronavirus can spread between humans, but started in a wildlife market

#245

I don't understand why people eat monkey or bats? if they have all these virus or diseases in them. It's 2020 we have more food in the world than we did years ago no need to eat a bat just grab an apple.

Or cattle and poultry. So you’d probably indeed need to become vegan

Re: New coronavirus can spread between humans, but started in a wildlife market

#246
post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Shaming the choice to eat a food is a dark pattern. It shouldn't be. Food is a very topical, superficial aspect of culture and the average person has more than enough choice in what they eat. If eating bats is causing serious pandemics, then I'm going to shame eating bats. If shark fin soup is damaging the ecology, then I'm going to shame shark fin soup. If high-sugar diets are resulting in massive health problems,…

Do you eat beef, or any mass-farmed meats? Crops like almonds or tomatoes? The collection eating of beef does a lot of ecological damage through the destruction of natural habitats for grazing space and cattle feed, as well as the emission of methane into the atmosphere. Do you need to be shamed? Perhaps you would like to shame me?

I don’t get what your point is.

If you’re trying to defend Chinese eating habits the vast majority of Chinese people don’t partake in eating “exotic” meats like bats, live mice, and dogs. Most would be horrified as well.

Re: New coronavirus can spread between humans, but started in a wildlife market

#247
post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Vice article that is cited by sdiw doesn't mention that the virus came from "bats being eaten.[1]" The article does state "new report points to the original animal source: bats" but nothing about bats being eaten. Maybe I missed something, please let me know. :) The National Geographic article states the following: > "[T]he highest prevalence of coronaviruses tend to be extruded by animals through feces, or guano…

The claim is the virus originated from a wet market where animals like bats sold for food, so it’s not inaccurate to suggest it was transmitted by bats meant for human consumption.

> The claim is the virus originated from a wet market where animals like bats sold for food, so it’s not inaccurate to suggest it was transmitted by bats meant for human consumption.

It absolutely is. You don't have any evidence for this, just speculation. Is it plausible? Sure. Is it "most probably" (as the commenter above suggested, linking to a source)? No, there's no evidence cited that the disease was spread by eating bats in the article.

So yes, it is inaccurate to make a claim, and then cite a source which doesn't make that claim, without making it clear that you're just speculating, and have no actual information to add.

Re: New coronavirus can spread between humans, but started in a wildlife market

#248
post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can an N95 mask prevent viral infection? Those things are typically for particulates and are charged so things like dust attach to the fibers. I’m not sure they’re effective for aerosolized particles

There's very little evidence N95 masks work better than surgical masks, which are cheaper and easier to use.

Umm, properly used N95 masks have been shown to filter particles <10 nm...

Re: New coronavirus can spread between humans, but started in a wildlife market

#250
post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It isn't, but is an opportunity for that to happen. The eating of 'bush meat' is how lots of Zoonosis events happen. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zoonosis

The list in the article you linked indicates that eating undercooked meat is a mode of transmission only for parasites, prion-based diseases, and a couple of bacterial diseases. It doesn't seem plausible for a viral disease, especially a respiratory one. On the other hand, capturing, keeping, butchering, and preparing bats could present a risk. With Ebola, butchering of bush meat was cited as a likely vector.

Eating bush meat is what causes people to do all those other things you list.
Post reply on HN