Letters | Coronavirus in Hong Kong: why the government decided to euthanise, not quarantine, hamsters
- Readers explain why quarantine-and-test was not a viable response to a pet shop outbreak, question the justification behind flight bans and varying quarantine orders, take issue with a health expert’s opinion on vaccination, and call for a refocus on the true purpose of social distancing measures
This outbreak was the first known case of natural infection in hamsters globally and was also the first known case of hamster-to-human transmission. In light of this, earlier advice from the World Organisation for Animal Health and others about the low probability of pet animal-to-human transmission had to be reviewed.
Decisions had to be made based on the evidence from this novel outbreak and experimental findings with hamsters, not on previous experience with other species that have not yet been associated with transmission to humans. In particular, it is known that hamsters are capable of shedding very large quantities of virus and that contact and airborne transmission between hamsters can occur easily, based on experimental studies.
Having identified two latest import consignments totalling some 1,900 hamsters with relatively higher risk of carrying the Covid-19 virus, we decided to euthanise all the hamsters in the infected places and other pet shops. We also advised owners to surrender their hamsters purchased after December 22 last year to us for humane dispatch to prevent further spread of the disease.