4

I see a lot of articles in the media mentioning new bat species and adding references in the articles or the titles linking bats to coronavirus [The links in ref1 at the bottom are just some samples]. Although not all of them mention explicitly the COVID-19 strain the mention is quite enough to reinforce less reliable sources which link bats to the epidemic. A lot of the articles also mention that the scientific community believes bats are the origin of the epidemic, however the only source I found online [ref2] mentions that although coronavirus is common in bats it is likely that the COVID-19 strain was transmitted by another animal host. A few month old article [ref3] cites a Chinese study identifying the pangolin as the animal source, but chances seem pretty slim, the pangolin is protected, some people consume it illegally, but the actual number of contacts is small.

Are there scientific studies comparing the odds of transmission from different animal sources? Are there studies taking into account the huge pig farms in the area? (In that period to hide the infections of foot-and-mouth disease a lot of dead animals were disposed of in an unsanitary manner).

BTW in the title I wrote consensus instead of evidence because I am aware that no study could be so advanced to reach the level of evidence, however the repetition of the idea of consensus in the media is enough to fuel sources at the level of conspiracy theory.

Ref1:
https://edition.cnn.com/2020/04/22/world/leaf-nosed-bats-discovery-scn/index.html

https://www.msn.com/en-us/video/animals/new-bat-species-discovered-are-cousins-to-ones-linked-to-covid-19/vi-BB1339uR

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-8245065/Four-species-bat-discovered-Africa-sisters-species-COVID-19-originated.html

https://www.foxnews.com/science/newly-discovered-bat-species-are-cousins-of-those-linked-to-coronavirus

Ref 2:
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/03/200317175442.htm

Ref 3:
https://www.euronews.com/2020/02/21/covid-19-latest-korea-confirms-204-cases-of-coronavirus-after-church-outbreak

18
  • 1
    The issue with the [bat->human] versus [bat->another host->human] is that no-one here is claiming a direct [bat->human] jump. – Oddthinking Apr 27 '20 at 13:49
  • 1
    @fredsbend Articles in the media state "The scientific community believe that ..." So no article refers to a scientific study, It seems designed to make claim difficult to verify, I can't say for sure. But the question is addressed to those article, the existence of scientific studies was not claimed. – FluidCode Apr 27 '20 at 15:24
  • 4
    Be specific. Choose one mainstream media claim. Quote it. Ask if it is true. – Oddthinking Apr 27 '20 at 15:40
  • 3
    @FluidCode: Their point's that COVID-19 is a condition that can be caused by the virus SARS-CoV-2. Still, Oddthinking's recommendation is the thing to focus on here: choose one mainstream claim, quote it, and ask if it's true. – Nat Apr 27 '20 at 19:33
  • 4
    @FluidCode: Eh... honestly, it's your question that comes off as vague. Which isn't to suggest that you're doing anything intentionally wrong, just, there's communication difficulty that we're trying to resolve. Directly quoting something would seem helpful in resolving that communication difficulty. – Nat Apr 27 '20 at 19:40

Browse other questions tagged .