The coronavirus most likely originated in bats and was transferred to humans through a civet
Analysis and comparison of the Covid-19 genome suggest that it originated in bats and was transmitted to humans through an intermediary host, possibly a pangolin or other non-domestic animal. Bats appear to have an altered innate immune system that allows them to tolerate some viral infections without developing disease and consequently, they are the reservoir for a wide range of infections, some of which infect humans. Multiple different types of coronaviruses (>500) have been identified in bats and the coronavirus that caused SARS in 2002 almost certainly originated in bats and was transferred to humans via an intermediary civet cat (e.d a small, lean, mostly nocturnal mammal). This probably came about because there is a substantial trade in China of “exotic” animals obtained from the wild; these are sold for food and traditional medicines. There is some speculation that the endangered pangolin (or scaly ant-eater) may have been the intermediary host in the current outbreak. Despite this, the actual origin of Covid-19 has not yet been identified. The closest bat coronavirus that has been identified shares about 96% of its genome with Covid-19 while the most recent report suggests that the closest coronavirus found in pangolins only shares 85 to 92% of the genetic material.
Mariners had painstakingly mapped the coastlines of the continents. Geographers had translated these findings into charts and globes. Photographs of ...
It's the idea that people living close to nature tend to be noble. It's seeing all those sunsets that does it. You can't watch a sunset and then go off and set fire to your neighbor's tepee. Living close to nature is wonderful for your mental health.
But we can easily extend this hypothesis [that nature has beneficial effects on the physical, cognitive and emotional well-being of individuals] to the conservation of biodiversity. [Ecologists] refer to the extinction of the experience of nature, which they have mainly applied in urban areas. The idea is as follows: from generation to generation, young people live less and less in contact with nature (because there are fewer of them and because their lifestyles limit such contact), at the very moment they are building their identity. The part of their identity that integrates their intimate relationships with their natural environment would therefore diminish from generation to generation. Not because of a lack of education, but mainly because of a decline in opportunities and desires to experience nature without constraint, freely and in their own personal way.
The consequences of this decrease appear in adulthood: with a weaker environmental identity, they are less in demand for nature in their daily lives, they integrate it less in their actions. (...) But if we do not collectively take biodiversity into consideration in our lifestyles, then we will suffer.
An inefficient virus kills its host. A clever virus stays with it.