Skip to main content

What is it like to Be a Wet Market

Gwyneth Paltrow's new Netflix series slammed by NHS executive

 The "wet markets" of the Peoples' Republic of China have received a fair amount of abuse, via allegations that they are responsible for the rise of the destructive coronavirus... there is a self-congratulatory social media meme, "we don't eat bats over here." So presumably "they" are at fault "over there."

 Indeed, a September 2019 article in a peer-reviewed journal concluded, in more august scientific language, proposed "biological behavioral surveillance in high-risk geographic areas in order to reduce the risk of zoonotic disease emergence." That apparently means somebody should keep track of what's going on in the wet markets of emerging countries and crack down on practices that might enhance risks. The same study identified "serological evidence of bat coronavirus spillover in rural communities in Southern China." 

 Here's a link to the source for those quotes: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590053619300308 

 That obviously doesn't imply that the pandemic began with humans eating bats. It could be, as speculated in the movie CONTAGION, that the American jet-setter played by Gwyneth Paltrow simply ate pork in Macau before getting on her flight to Chicago -- eating the remains of a pig who had had an encounter with the wrong bat at the wrong time. 

 But the same people who turn this into a taunt have another theory. They want this to be a conspiracy, which they can use to justify trade sanctions, or more, against the PRC. If it all began in rather the manner portrayed in the final flashback scene of CONTAGION, no one is at fault. One could fault whoever sponsors the wet markets, or has control of the land where they take place,, for not seeing to it that the sties are properly enclosed to keep the bats out, but that seems a lame excuse for trade sanctions. Indeed, it seems an excessive regulatory demand since I'm betting many of the pig farmers of the PRC live subsistence existences and imposing new costs could mean real hardship. 

 So it is understandable that the blame-China crowd have another theory. This came from a govt laboratory. It was the consequence of an accident in the testing of bio weapons. Or maybe it wasn't an accident, but a war waged by China against the rest of the world at the expense of a lot of its own people because life is so cheap there.  

 Notice that these theories are mutually exclusive and any evidence in favor of any of the three of them (wet markets, accidental release, act of war) is evidence against the others. But in the haze of disinformation people want to assert all of them. The exotica of the wet markets, the slur against people on the edge of starvation, the alleged sloppiness of scientists and technocrats, the act of war demanding response in kind -- it all fits together somehow in the minds of all too many.

 Get it together, people. 
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A Story About Coleridge

This is a quote from a memoir by Dorothy Wordsworth, reflecting on a trip she took with two famous poets, her brother, William Wordsworth, and their similarly gifted companion, Samuel Taylor Coleridge.   We sat upon a bench, placed for the sake of one of these views, whence we looked down upon the waterfall, and over the open country ... A lady and gentleman, more expeditious tourists than ourselves, came to the spot; they left us at the seat, and we found them again at another station above the Falls. Coleridge, who is always good-natured enough to enter into conversation with anybody whom he meets in his way, began to talk with the gentleman, who observed that it was a majestic waterfall. Coleridge was delighted with the accuracy of the epithet, particularly as he had been settling in his own mind the precise meaning of the words grand, majestic, sublime, etc., and had discussed the subject with William at some length the day before. “Yes, sir,” says Coleridge, “it is a maj...
9 comments
Read more

Searle: The Chinese Room

John Searle has become the object of accusations of improper conduct. These accusations even have some people in the world of academic philosophy saying that instructors in that world should try to avoid teaching Searle's views. That is an odd contention, and has given rise to heated exchanges in certain corners of the blogosphere.  At Leiter Reports, I encountered a comment from someone describing himself as "grad student drop out." GSDO said: " This is a side question (and not at all an attempt to answer the question BL posed): How important is John Searle's work? Are people still working on speech act theory or is that just another dead end in the history of 20th century philosophy? My impression is that his reputation is somewhat inflated from all of his speaking engagements and NYRoB reviews. The Chinese room argument is a classic, but is there much more to his work than that?" I took it upon myself to answer that on LR. But here I'll tak...
17 comments
Read more

Recent Controversies Involving Nassim Taleb, Part I

I've written about Nassim Taleb on earlier occasions in this blog. I'll let you do the search yourself, dear reader, for the full background. The short answer to the question "who is Taleb?" is this: he is a 57 year old man born in Lebanon, educated in France, who has been both a hedge fund manager and a derivatives trader. He retired from active participation from the financial world sometime between 2004 and 2006, and has been a full-time writer and provocateur ever since. Taleb's writings for the general public began where one might expect -- in the field where he had made his money -- and he explained certain financial issues to a broad audiences in a very dramatic non-technical way. Since then, he has widened has fields of study, writing about just about everything, applying the intellectual tools he honed in that earlier work. As you might have gather from the above, I respect Taleb, though I have sometimes been critical of him when my own writing ab...
4 comments
Read more