5 ms·

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

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 in the case of bats. Coronaviruses not only spread via the air and the respiratory tract, but also if fecal matter comes in contact with another creature’s mouth. Bats aren’t exactly clean, so if one nibbles on a fruit, the food may get contaminated with fecal matter. If the fruit drops to the ground, then it can serve as a viral crossover point for farmed animals like civets." [2] It seems more likely the virus jumped from the bat to another animal that ate something contaminated with bat guano infected with the virus. That animal was then traded at this market where the virus somehow spread to humans. This lead me to find the following Wikipedia article on Civets[3]. This mentions how Civets are farmed and fed coffee cherries then the partly digested coffee beans are harvested from the Civets fecal matter. This is purely speculation, but this could be one way that the virus could have spread to humans. A Civet ate a coffee cherry that an infected horseshoe bat had contaminated with guano infected with the virus. The Civet was traded at this market and the virus spread to humans. Once again, this is pure speculation on my part but it shows how there are other mechanisms in which the virus could spread to humans without someone 'eating bats'. [1] https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/xgqy3n/scientists-now-think-they-know-what-started-chinas-deadly-coronavirus-bats https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/xgqy3n/scientists-now-thi... [2] https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/2020/01/new-coronavirus-spreading-between-humans-how-it-started/ https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/2020/01/new-coron... [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civet#Coffee https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civet#Coffee

runawaybottle 7y ago
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?
- jkqwzsoo 7y ago
  > 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.
  - ycombonator 7y ago
    Video of TV Host promoting eating bats. Forced to apologize. https://mobile.twitter.com/pdchinese/status/1221071113645625344 https://mobile.twitter.com/pdchinese/status/1221071113645625...
- ycombonator 7y ago
  South China Morning Post has an interesting read on wet markets and exotic meat https://www.inkstonenews.com/health/chinas-coronavirus-outbreak-may-be-linked-penchant-people-eat-wildlife/article/3047304 https://www.inkstonenews.com/health/chinas-coronavirus-outbr...
tempsy 7y ago
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.
- oiasdjfoiasd 7y ago
  this is such poor logic i dont know where to begin.
- jkqwzsoo 7y ago
  > 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.
  - tempsy 7y ago
    It came from a wet market for exotic meats. If it wasn’t a bat it was some other animal that was illegally trafficked and shouldn’t have been sold for consumption.
    - jkqwzsoo 7y ago
      > It came from a wet market for exotic meats. If it wasn’t a bat it was some other animal that was illegally trafficked and shouldn’t have been sold for consumption. And this has what to do about making specific claims without evidence? With passing off sources as supporting your claims when they make no such claim?
      - tempsy 7y ago
        That is a fact that has been reported by dozens of news outlets. The market in question has been shut down.
mc32 7y ago
It looks like it's really too early to tell and so far it looks like initial reports of it having a nexus in the market were premature. It's still uncertain where the first patients got it from. Originally Wuhan gov was saying their first patients were on Dec 27, but that's being revised to Dec 1. So it seems given the disparity in dates the assertion of the epidemic having started in the market is unconfirmed at this time and Is more the result of speculation (or misinformation).

runawaybottle 7y ago

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?

jkqwzsoo 7y ago
> 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.
- ycombonator 7y ago
  Video of TV Host promoting eating bats. Forced to apologize. https://mobile.twitter.com/pdchinese/status/1221071113645625344 https://mobile.twitter.com/pdchinese/status/1221071113645625...
ycombonator 7y ago
South China Morning Post has an interesting read on wet markets and exotic meat https://www.inkstonenews.com/health/chinas-coronavirus-outbreak-may-be-linked-penchant-people-eat-wildlife/article/3047304 https://www.inkstonenews.com/health/chinas-coronavirus-outbr...

tempsy 7y ago

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.

oiasdjfoiasd 7y ago
this is such poor logic i dont know where to begin.
jkqwzsoo 7y ago
> 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.
- tempsy 7y ago
  It came from a wet market for exotic meats. If it wasn’t a bat it was some other animal that was illegally trafficked and shouldn’t have been sold for consumption.
  - jkqwzsoo 7y ago
    > It came from a wet market for exotic meats. If it wasn’t a bat it was some other animal that was illegally trafficked and shouldn’t have been sold for consumption. And this has what to do about making specific claims without evidence? With passing off sources as supporting your claims when they make no such claim?
    - tempsy 7y ago
      That is a fact that has been reported by dozens of news outlets. The market in question has been shut down.

mc32 7y ago

It looks like it's really too early to tell and so far it looks like initial reports of it having a nexus in the market were premature. It's still uncertain where the first patients got it from. Originally Wuhan gov was saying their first patients were on Dec 27, but that's being revised to Dec 1. So it seems given the disparity in dates the assertion of the epidemic having started in the market is unconfirmed at this time and Is more the result of speculation (or misinformation).