Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 8 de 8
Filter
1.
Glob Ecol Conserv ; 43: e02463, 2023 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2306601

ABSTRACT

Given the link between perceptions of zoonotic risk and support for regulations such as wildlife consumption bans, debates regarding the origins of COVID-19 are likely to have conservation implications. Specifically, alternative hypotheses that cast doubt on COVID-19's zoonotic origins could potentially lessen momentum for China's wildlife policy reforms and their associated conservation impacts. To better understand the impact of COVID-19 origin debates on China's wildlife policies, we conducted a 974-respondent survey across mainland China, supplemented by policy and media reviews. We examined perceptions of three facets of COVID-19 origins: geographic location, source (e.g., wildlife farm, wet market, etc.), and specific wildlife species as transmitters. Our findings reveal that 64.6 % of respondents believed COVID-19 originated in the United States or Europe, not in China. Further, compared to the baseline group of respondents who selected China as the origin country, respondents who selected the United States or Europe as the origin had a greater likelihood of selecting laboratories/research and imported frozen foods as likely sources, while these respondents had a lower likelihood of selecting wild animals in a wet market or natural causes as likely sources. Despite such varied beliefs regarding COVID-19 origins, support for wildlife policy reforms was strong: 89.5 % of respondents who previously consumed wildlife self-indicated reduced consumption after the pandemic and 70.5 % of respondents supported banning the trade of all wildlife species. Moreover, those respondents who selected wild animals in a wet market as a likely source of COVID-19 had a greater likelihood of supporting a trade ban on all wild-caught wildlife and all farmed wildlife. Our results indicate that, although investigation of COVID-19's origins is on-going and politicized, there is clear support for wildlife reforms in China that can promote conservation outcomes.

2.
Pathogenic Coronaviruses of Humans and Animals ; : 53-124, 2023.
Article in English | ScienceDirect | ID: covidwho-2083144

ABSTRACT

In 2002, a severe-to-fatal respiratory disease began in China and was named severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS). The causative agent was soon found to be a coronavirus and was named SARS-coronavirus (SARS-CoV). Infection was traced to contact with live palm civet cats or raccoon dogs in live animal food markets (“wet markets”) and later, person-to-person. Visiting these markets or restaurants housing these animals before preparing them for customer consumption were among the risk factors for infection in addition to frequent use of taxis and comorbidities. After its initial appearance, SARS spread rapidly through parts of Asia and then to countries around the world before almost completely disappearing in 2003. It caused 8096 cases and 774 deaths. SARS-CoV is a betacoronavirus linage B. The single-stranded RNA genome of coronaviruses is the largest among RNA viruses. The size of the genome, the inaccuracy of replication in most coronaviruses, and homogenous and heterogenous genetic recombination contribute to the high frequency of mutation. The viral spike (S) protein binds to angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 on the host cell before entry. Mutations in the S protein make a substantial contribution to viral transmission to additional host species and cell types in addition to viral virulence as the virus adapted to its new hosts. Interestingly, SARS-CoV isolates from the initial stages of the 2002–2003 epidemic were more virulent than those isolated later and are associated with a 29-nucleotide deletion in the S protein gene. Several insectivorous Chinese bats appear to serve as reservoir hosts for the ancestorial coronavirus. New forms of protection against infection were implemented in China and some other countries and include wearing face masks, thermal screening, and avoiding travel in taxis and public transportation. Their effectiveness in decreasing transmission and the rapid end of the epidemic is unknown.

3.
Sci Total Environ ; 819: 153043, 2022 May 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1619721

ABSTRACT

Wet markets sell fresh food and are a global phenomenon. They are important for food security in many regions worldwide but have come under scrutiny due to their potential role in the emergence of infectious diseases. The sale of live wildlife has been highlighted as a particular risk, and the World Health Organisation has called for the banning of live, wild-caught mammalian species in markets unless risk assessment and effective regulations are in place. Following PRISMA guidelines, we conducted a global scoping review of peer-reviewed information about the sale of live, terrestrial wildlife in markets that are likely to sell fresh food, and collated data about the characteristics of such markets, activities involving live wildlife, the species sold, their purpose, and animal, human, and environmental health risks that were identified. Of the 56 peer-reviewed records within scope, only 25% (n = 14) focussed on disease risks; the rest focused on the impact of wildlife sale on conservation. Although there were some global patterns (for example, the types of markets and purpose of sale of wildlife), there was wide diversity and huge epistemic uncertainty in all aspects associated with live, terrestrial wildlife sale in markets such that the feasibility of accurate assessment of the risk of emerging infectious disease associated with live wildlife trade in markets is currently limited. Given the value of both wet markets and wildlife trade and the need to support food affordability and accessibility, conservation, public health, and the social and economic aspects of livelihoods of often vulnerable people, there are major information gaps that need to be addressed to develop evidence-based policy in this environment. This review identifies these gaps and provides a foundation from which information for risk assessments can be collected.


Subject(s)
Animals, Wild , Communicable Diseases , Animals , Commerce , Public Health , Zoonoses
4.
Soc Sci Humanit Open ; 4(1): 100161, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1593663

ABSTRACT

The article seeks to understand the position of Global South communities and ethnicities in contemporary global politics, using the COVID-19 crisis to illustrate and evidence the practical application of the decolonial theories. In two separate topics, it chronologically analyzes the racialization of the pandemics through the examples of the Asian and African (diasporic and continental) communities' respective homogenous stereotypes and their emergence between the outbreak of and attempted cure to the virus, comparing them to the ethno-racial categories historically attributed to the groups.

5.
Environmental Research Letters ; 17(1):5, 2022.
Article in English | Web of Science | ID: covidwho-1585206
6.
Food Ethics ; 6(2): 10, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1240109

ABSTRACT

There were excellent reasons to reform intensive animal agriculture prior to COVID-19. Unfortunately, though, intensive animal agriculture has grown rapidly over the last century. All signs indicate that it will continue to grow in the future. This is bad news for billions of animals. It's also bad news for those who want an animal-friendly food system. Because the public isn't very concerned about the plight of animals-or is concerned, but has a high tolerance for cognitive dissonance-animal activists regularly engage in indirect activism. Indirect activism involves arguing that some cause that's indirectly related to the activist's primary agenda provides reasons to act in ways that are congruent with that agenda. In this paper, we consider the two indirect arguments that animal activists advanced in the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic: first, some used COVID-19 to criticize intensive animal agriculture-many of these had US-based audiences as their target; second, and more modestly, some activists used COVID-19 to condemn wet markets specifically. We contend that both arguments had the risk of backfiring: they risked promoting the very systems that are worst for animals. We then assess the moral significance of this risk, concluding that while it may have been permissible to advance these arguments, there were some serious moral considerations against doing so-ones that weren't addressed by flagging animal activists' concern for animals or any other stakeholder in the discussion. In both cases, we think there are plausible precautionary arguments against the strategies that these activists pursued. Additionally, in the case of arguments against wet markets specifically, we contend that the precautionary argument can be supplemented with a side constraint condition that, arguably, activists violated insofar as they were acting in ways that maintain a racist and xenophobic system.

7.
Hum Ecol Interdiscip J ; 48(6): 749-756, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-927826

ABSTRACT

We designed a self-administered 20-item questionnaire to determine changes in attitudes towards wildlife consumption in Chinese adults during the SARS epidemic in 2002-2003 and on-going COVID-19 pandemic that was first identified in December 2019. A total of 348 adults (177 males and 171 females) with a mean age of 29.4 ± 8.5 years participated, the majority (66.7%) from Hubei. The percentages of participants who had eaten wildlife significantly decreased from 27.0% during SARS to 17.8% during COVID-19 (P = 0.032). The most common reason participants provided for consuming wildlife was to try something novel (64.9% during SARS and 54.8% during COVID-19). More than half of participants (≥53.5%) reported that they had stopped eating wildlife meat because most species of wildlife are legally protected. Our study results indicate over the period between the SARS epidemic to the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, attitudes towards the consumption of wildlife in China have changed significantly.

8.
Microorganisms ; 8(4)2020 Apr 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-72282

ABSTRACT

Hong Kong's wet markets play a crucial role in the country's supply of safe, fresh meat to satisfy the dietary needs of its population. Whilst food safety regulations have been introduced over the past few years to maintain the microbial safety of foods sold from these wet markets, it remains unclear whether the hygiene maintenance that is performed on the wooden cutting boards used for meat-processing is effective. In fact, hygiene maintenance may often be overlooked, and hygiene standards may be insufficient. If so, this may lead to the spread of harmful pathogens through cross-contamination, thereby causing severe risks to public health. The aim of this study was to determine the level of microbial transfer between wooden cutting boards and swine meat of various qualities, using 16S metagenomic sequencing, strain identification and biofilm screening of isolated strains. The results established that: (a) the traditional hygiene practices used for cleaning wooden cutting boards in Hong Kong's wet markets expose the surfaces to potentially harmful microorganisms; (b) the processing of microbially contaminated meat on cutting boards cleaned using traditional practices leads to cross-contamination; and (c) several potentially pathogenic microorganisms found on the cutting boards have good biofilm-forming abilities. These results reinforce the need to review the traditional methods used to clean wooden cutting boards after the processing of raw meat in Hong Kong' wet markets so as to prevent cross-contamination events. The establishment of proper hygiene protocols may reduce the spread of disease-causing microorganisms (including antibiotic-resistant microorganisms) in food-processing environments.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL