Animal-based food systems are unsafe: severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) fosters the debate on meat consumption.

OBJECTIVE: The current pandemic restarts a debate on permanently banning wildlife consumption in an effort to prevent further public health threats. In this commentary, we offer two ideas to enhance the discussion on foodborne zoonotic diseases in food systems. DESIGN: First, we focus on the probable consequences that the loss of access to wildlife could cause to the status of food and nutrition security of many people in developing countries that rely on bushmeat to subsist. Second, we argue that all animal-based food systems, especially the ones based on intensive husbandry, present food safety threats. CONCLUSION: To ban the access to bushmeat without a rational analysis of all human meat production and consumption in the global animal-based food system will not help us to prevent future outbreaks.

Perception of health risks in Lao market vendors.

Wet markets are a critical part of South-East Asian culture and economy. However, their role in circulation and transmission of both endemic and emerging disease is a source of concern in a region considered a hotspot of disease emergence. In the Lao People's Democratic Republic (Lao PDR, Laos), live and dead wild animals are frequently found in wet markets, despite legislation against the bushmeat trade. This is generally considered to increase the risk of disease transmission and emergence, although whether or not wildlife vendors themselves have indeed increased incidence of zoonotic disease has rarely been assessed. In preparation for a future longitudinal study of market vendors investigating vendors' exposure to zoonotic pathogens, we conducted a pilot survey of Lao market vendors of wildlife meat, livestock meat and vegetables, to identify demographic characteristics and potential control groups within markets. We also investigated baseline risk perception for infectious diseases among market vendors and assessed the association between risk perception and risk mitigation behaviours. The surveys conducted with 177 vendors revealed similar age, sex, ethnic background and geographical origin between vendor types, but differences in professional background and work history for livestock meat vendors. The perception of disease risk was very low across all vendors, as was the reported use of personal protective equipment, and the two appeared unrelated. Personal risk discounting and assumptions about transmission routes may explain this lack of association. This information will help inform the development of future research, risk communication and risk mitigation policy, especially in the light of the COVID-19 pandemic.