destrekor
Lifer
- Nov 18, 2005
- 28,799
- 359
- 126
Even if it is a natural virus it could still have been released from a lab. It's far more racist in my opinion to say it was because people are eating bats and such than to say it was an accidental release by someone studying the virus.
*edited out the politics*
There need be no bat consumption for zoonotic transfer.
And remember, it may have nothing to do with bats as a direct source for humans. Remember "Avian influenza" aka "bird flu"? It's unlikely it actually came from birds; IIRC the evidence pointed toward it having arose from a recombination in a pig, as apparently pigs can be infected by both normally human and avian influenza.
As for the eventual zoonotic transfer, not sure about birds but mammals sneeze (to include bats I think) and cough. It's a very very good thing that most viruses cannot spread via zoonotic transfer, not commonly at least.
What's interesting is how often it doesn't appear to happen, but I suspect numerous examples just went nowhere due to not being an advantageous recombination or even mutation(s). Which is to say that zoonotic transfers likely happen more often than we think, we don't actually identify the vast majority of infections. When we get the "common cold" it could be rhinovirus, RSV, various human coronaviruses, and a whole slew of others that can cause varied reactions, from cold-like to death-like. Likely more often are viruses that, after recombination(s) or mutation(s) just.. fizzle, or blend right into the common cold variety of seasonal viruses. Occasionally they'll end up discovering some "new" virus but after enough research conclude it was one that's gone around for generations.