Apr 16, 2020 06:36 AM
(This post was last modified: Apr 16, 2020 03:50 PM by C C.)
RELATED THREADS: "Escape from benign lab" conspiracy actually becoming tenable? ... UN: ban wildlife markets to avert pandemics ... PETA takes on China's & world's wet markets
Banning wet markets is more complicated than it seems
https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/2020/...-reopening
EXCERPT (video at bottom): . . . a new survey [...] asked 5,000 participants from Hong Kong, Japan, Myanmar, Thailand, and Vietnam what they think about markets that sell wildlife (as some, but not all, wet markets do). It found that 93 percent of respondents were likely to support action by their governments to eliminate illegal and unregulated wildlife markets. And 84 percent said they were unlikely or very unlikely to buy wildlife products in the future.
But the campaign to shut down these markets is more complicated than it seems. Part of the problem is one of definition. [...] there are gradations here, and they represent different levels of risk for zoonotic diseases (those transmitted from animals to humans) ... Another issue is that there are socioeconomic as well as cultural factors to consider. Some experts caution that millions of low-income people would lose access to cheap sources of food, and many farmers would lose out on needed income, in the case of an all-out ban on wet markets.
Let’s get two things straight up front. First, wet markets aren’t unique to China. They’re common in many parts of the world [...] Second, wet markets and wildlife markets aren’t synonymous, though they’re often used interchangeably. This semantic slippage is actually driving a lot of the confusion in the debate about whether to ban all wet markets.
One recent study offered this very clear definition of wet markets: “A typical wet market is a partially open commercial complex with vending stalls organized in rows; they often have slippery floors and narrow aisles along which independent vendors primarily sell ‘wet’ items such as meat, poultry, seafood, vegetables, and fruits.”
Note that there’s nothing about wildlife in this definition. That’s because a wet market doesn’t necessarily include “exotic” wild animals. [...] In Western media, “wet markets” are portrayed as emblems of Chinese otherness ... This fuels Sinophobia. In reality, most seafood, live animal and wholesale markets in China contain far less exotic fare. ... Among today’s wet markets, you’ll find some that sell no live animals whatsoever, just slaughtered animals and produce; some that carry common live animals like chickens or fish; and some that sell wildlife like bats and snakes.
[...] in China, the wet markets are culturally treasured places ... relaxation after exhausted workdays. ... a sense of being alive. ... Another man in the same study said he values the trust between food vendors and consumers, which gives him the sense of belonging to a community and assures him of the food’s freshness ... the question is: Would an all-out ban on China’s wet markets make any more sense than an all-out ban on America’s farmers markets?
Experts disagree about exactly how far a ban should extend. Some say we need to ban just the sale of wild animals, while others say we need to ban all live animals from being slaughtered and sold in close quarters. But experts tend to agree that any responsible course of action will be more complex than simply banning wet markets altogether.
[...] anthropologists, likewise argued that a permanent shutdown would do more harm than good, at least in China: It would deprive Chinese consumers of a food sector that accounts for 30-59 percent of their food supplies. ... the abolition of “wet markets” is also likely to lead to an explosion of an uncontrollable black market ... This would involve enormously greater risk to public and global health than the legal and regulated live animal markets in China today. … What “wet markets” in China require is more scientific and evidence-based regulation, rather than being abolished and driven underground.
[...] It was out of economic necessity that some Chinese farmers began to breed wild animals in recent decades. ... But ... it would be possible to safeguard people’s income security while banning the sale of wildlife in Chinese wet markets. “People who work in the wildlife industry represent a small percentage of China’s enormous labor force. And the majority of people working in wildlife trade also do something else ... When people stop working in these markets, they should get some help from the government.” That could make a surge in illegal trade less likely.
[...] the Chinese government has exempted wildlife for traditional medicine from its ban. ... Westerners shouldn’t be fooled into thinking that Chinese consumers must be allowed access to wildlife products because it’s part of their ancient culture. While there are classic Chinese texts extolling the healing properties of certain wildlife products ... Instead, “the demand for wildlife products has been created by the industry for commercial purposes, for profit. Traditional Chinese medicine has been used..." [opportunistically exploited]
The sale of wildlife in wet markets creates a serious risk of pandemics because it forces together animal species that would not encounter each other under ordinary circumstances, and then puts human beings in contact with these animals’ pathogens, to which we haven’t had the chance to develop any immunity. Many experts and even wet market aficionados now agree that the risk to human health is just too great.
In theory, it should be possible for China to permanently ban the sale of wildlife in wet markets without endangering many people’s food security, income security, and valued culinary culture by banning wet markets altogether. But that would require the government to stop kowtowing to the wildlife farming industry, which has immense lobbying power... (MORE - details)
RELATED: Tour of the average Chinese wet market
https://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/whbyuy2nHBg
Banning wet markets is more complicated than it seems
https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/2020/...-reopening
EXCERPT (video at bottom): . . . a new survey [...] asked 5,000 participants from Hong Kong, Japan, Myanmar, Thailand, and Vietnam what they think about markets that sell wildlife (as some, but not all, wet markets do). It found that 93 percent of respondents were likely to support action by their governments to eliminate illegal and unregulated wildlife markets. And 84 percent said they were unlikely or very unlikely to buy wildlife products in the future.
But the campaign to shut down these markets is more complicated than it seems. Part of the problem is one of definition. [...] there are gradations here, and they represent different levels of risk for zoonotic diseases (those transmitted from animals to humans) ... Another issue is that there are socioeconomic as well as cultural factors to consider. Some experts caution that millions of low-income people would lose access to cheap sources of food, and many farmers would lose out on needed income, in the case of an all-out ban on wet markets.
Let’s get two things straight up front. First, wet markets aren’t unique to China. They’re common in many parts of the world [...] Second, wet markets and wildlife markets aren’t synonymous, though they’re often used interchangeably. This semantic slippage is actually driving a lot of the confusion in the debate about whether to ban all wet markets.
One recent study offered this very clear definition of wet markets: “A typical wet market is a partially open commercial complex with vending stalls organized in rows; they often have slippery floors and narrow aisles along which independent vendors primarily sell ‘wet’ items such as meat, poultry, seafood, vegetables, and fruits.”
Note that there’s nothing about wildlife in this definition. That’s because a wet market doesn’t necessarily include “exotic” wild animals. [...] In Western media, “wet markets” are portrayed as emblems of Chinese otherness ... This fuels Sinophobia. In reality, most seafood, live animal and wholesale markets in China contain far less exotic fare. ... Among today’s wet markets, you’ll find some that sell no live animals whatsoever, just slaughtered animals and produce; some that carry common live animals like chickens or fish; and some that sell wildlife like bats and snakes.
[...] in China, the wet markets are culturally treasured places ... relaxation after exhausted workdays. ... a sense of being alive. ... Another man in the same study said he values the trust between food vendors and consumers, which gives him the sense of belonging to a community and assures him of the food’s freshness ... the question is: Would an all-out ban on China’s wet markets make any more sense than an all-out ban on America’s farmers markets?
Experts disagree about exactly how far a ban should extend. Some say we need to ban just the sale of wild animals, while others say we need to ban all live animals from being slaughtered and sold in close quarters. But experts tend to agree that any responsible course of action will be more complex than simply banning wet markets altogether.
[...] anthropologists, likewise argued that a permanent shutdown would do more harm than good, at least in China: It would deprive Chinese consumers of a food sector that accounts for 30-59 percent of their food supplies. ... the abolition of “wet markets” is also likely to lead to an explosion of an uncontrollable black market ... This would involve enormously greater risk to public and global health than the legal and regulated live animal markets in China today. … What “wet markets” in China require is more scientific and evidence-based regulation, rather than being abolished and driven underground.
[...] It was out of economic necessity that some Chinese farmers began to breed wild animals in recent decades. ... But ... it would be possible to safeguard people’s income security while banning the sale of wildlife in Chinese wet markets. “People who work in the wildlife industry represent a small percentage of China’s enormous labor force. And the majority of people working in wildlife trade also do something else ... When people stop working in these markets, they should get some help from the government.” That could make a surge in illegal trade less likely.
[...] the Chinese government has exempted wildlife for traditional medicine from its ban. ... Westerners shouldn’t be fooled into thinking that Chinese consumers must be allowed access to wildlife products because it’s part of their ancient culture. While there are classic Chinese texts extolling the healing properties of certain wildlife products ... Instead, “the demand for wildlife products has been created by the industry for commercial purposes, for profit. Traditional Chinese medicine has been used..." [opportunistically exploited]
The sale of wildlife in wet markets creates a serious risk of pandemics because it forces together animal species that would not encounter each other under ordinary circumstances, and then puts human beings in contact with these animals’ pathogens, to which we haven’t had the chance to develop any immunity. Many experts and even wet market aficionados now agree that the risk to human health is just too great.
In theory, it should be possible for China to permanently ban the sale of wildlife in wet markets without endangering many people’s food security, income security, and valued culinary culture by banning wet markets altogether. But that would require the government to stop kowtowing to the wildlife farming industry, which has immense lobbying power... (MORE - details)
RELATED: Tour of the average Chinese wet market