[1]: https://news.slashdot.org/story/22/05/20/1732226/ancient-for... [2]: https://twitter.com/NineDragons2/status/1524634961525026819
[1]: http://www.xinhuanet.com/english/2020-10/10/c_139430977.htm
[2]: https://www.alamy.com/beijing-china-17th-may-2018-photo-take...
[3]: https://www.livescience.com/new-sinkhole-discovered-china
I wish any of the coverage would go deeper into what makes this forest "ancient" and whether rare species have found a niche there.
[0] http://english.scib.ac.cn/ [1] http://english.xtbg.cas.cn/ [2] https://www.google.com/maps/@24.855629,106.7298439,696m/data...
No.
What creates risk are wet markets selling live wild-caught animals in unsanitary conditions. These are breeding grounds for diseases to develop in animal populations and especially to have lots of opportunities to develop the abilities to jump species.
Animals in the wild in China are of no greater risk than animals in the wild anywhere else in the world. Confinement, sanitation, and density is what creates risk, not national borders for animals in the wild.
That seems really confident and terse for a really complicated question. Wouldn't PPE be somewhat useful in protecting this 'ancient forest' from diseases the researchers/visitors may be bringing to the area?
> Confinement, sanitation, and density is what creates risk
That describes every industrial farm/mega farm. Guess which country has multiple ag-gag laws and anti-whistleblower laws? If your statement is true, why are such industries not only permitted to expand but even provided with subsidies from tax payers? [eg Wichita and Cargill ]
Would it be unfair to say the incredible demand for animals is what creates the risk?
A poorly regulated market which takes known risks (selling wild live animals kept in dense, squalid conditions for human consumption) creates the risk.
>Wouldn't PPE be somewhat useful in protecting this 'ancient forest' from diseases the researchers/visitors may be bringing to the area?
No. The remarkable part is that it is in a sinkhole, the ecology of it is likely entirely unremarkable. This is not a fragile super-isolated ecosystem (there are a few of these in caves or islands which are and do sometimes merit special protections because they've actually been well isolated beyond just being in a hole)
>That describes every industrial farm/mega farm.
The wet market risk comes from live wild-caught animals, squalid conditions, sold to eat. Industrial farming is a controlled closed environment where diseases are known and managed, it's not wonderful, but it is nothing like the wet market risks coming out of China and a few other places around the world.
That doesn't sound like an accurate description to me based on the evidence I have read and seen in Kansas. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7416595/ , https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1817674/
Is your assessment based on evidence? I'd be interested to read a statistical analysis comparing the number of diseases that have come out of "regulated" industrial/factory farming versus unregulated wet markets.