3 ms·

Another key vector is to reduce demand for ivory. The world needs to pressure the government of China, which drives demand and global ivory prices. [0] https:/

Another key vector is to reduce demand for ivory. The world needs to pressure the government of China, which drives demand and global ivory prices. [0] https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-019-09993-2 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-019-09993-2

tcbawo 6y ago
Has synthetic ivory gotten good enough to replace the natural source? Is it too expensive? Too easily distinguished? Demand too great?
- blodorn 6y ago
  One way to check for real v fake ivory is to heat a pin in a lighter and then try and poke a little hole. Real ivory doesn't melt at all, and a lot of imitation ivory does, and that is a very easy and expedient test.
  - ekanes 6y ago
    Thank you. Ideally we can blur the lines between these two, so that the price for one is ruined because they can't be distinguished.
- 6nf 6y ago
  Mammoth ivory is actually not as expensive as you might expect, that’s about as good as you can get
- sgt101 6y ago
  What is it for? The only application that I know of is to make trinkets and baubles. The desire for that kind of thing is a good test to separate humans from animals.
porpoise 6y ago
China banned all ivory trade at the end of 2017 and by all accounts (see WWF and NG sources cited in the tweet) it's been working quite well. https://www.twitter.com/RichardHanania/status/1339782810630987776 https://www.twitter.com/RichardHanania/status/13397828106309...
- hetspookjee 6y ago
  Yet the paper you reply to is written in sep 2019 and states that the Chinese market is still a massive influence. Don't you think that outweighs your tweet from 2018 from some guy?
  - porpoise 6y ago
    The reports I linked to argue that (i) demand has been significantly reduced. The paper I replied to argues that (ii) a reduction of demand is significantly correlated with a reduction of poaching. Not only is there no "outweighing" of the former by the latter, but the former depends for its point on the latter (i.e. there is no reason to care if (i) is true unless (ii) is true). The tweet is from this month. The NG article is from 2018, but the WWF article postdates the Nature article.
    - redis_mlc 6y ago
      I read the linked tweets, and found them pretty vague. Ivory powder is used in Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM), so it's more likely than not that China won't stop killing elephants (or rhinos.) Additionally, exotic TCM ingredients are considered to be a status symbol, so price is no object. In addition, there's a new development. The CCP is intruding into Asian and African countries using Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) as a pretext, and even positioning armies there. This could well accelerate poaching. I think you mean well, but consider the source of your information before being argumentative.

tcbawo 6y ago

Has synthetic ivory gotten good enough to replace the natural source? Is it too expensive? Too easily distinguished? Demand too great?

blodorn 6y ago
One way to check for real v fake ivory is to heat a pin in a lighter and then try and poke a little hole. Real ivory doesn't melt at all, and a lot of imitation ivory does, and that is a very easy and expedient test.
- ekanes 6y ago
  Thank you. Ideally we can blur the lines between these two, so that the price for one is ruined because they can't be distinguished.
6nf 6y ago
Mammoth ivory is actually not as expensive as you might expect, that’s about as good as you can get
sgt101 6y ago
What is it for? The only application that I know of is to make trinkets and baubles. The desire for that kind of thing is a good test to separate humans from animals.

porpoise 6y ago

China banned all ivory trade at the end of 2017 and by all accounts (see WWF and NG sources cited in the tweet) it's been working quite well. https://www.twitter.com/RichardHanania/status/1339782810630987776 https://www.twitter.com/RichardHanania/status/13397828106309...

hetspookjee 6y ago
Yet the paper you reply to is written in sep 2019 and states that the Chinese market is still a massive influence. Don't you think that outweighs your tweet from 2018 from some guy?
- porpoise 6y ago
  The reports I linked to argue that (i) demand has been significantly reduced. The paper I replied to argues that (ii) a reduction of demand is significantly correlated with a reduction of poaching. Not only is there no "outweighing" of the former by the latter, but the former depends for its point on the latter (i.e. there is no reason to care if (i) is true unless (ii) is true). The tweet is from this month. The NG article is from 2018, but the WWF article postdates the Nature article.
  - redis_mlc 6y ago
    I read the linked tweets, and found them pretty vague. Ivory powder is used in Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM), so it's more likely than not that China won't stop killing elephants (or rhinos.) Additionally, exotic TCM ingredients are considered to be a status symbol, so price is no object. In addition, there's a new development. The CCP is intruding into Asian and African countries using Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) as a pretext, and even positioning armies there. This could well accelerate poaching. I think you mean well, but consider the source of your information before being argumentative.