this post was submitted on 06 Nov 2024
108 points (90.3% liked)

Videos

14341 readers
549 users here now

For sharing interesting videos from around the Web!

Rules

  1. Videos only
  2. Follow the global Mastodon.World rules and the Lemmy.World TOS while posting and commenting.
  3. Don't be a jerk
  4. No advertising
  5. No political videos, post those to [email protected] instead.
  6. Avoid clickbait titles. (Tip: Use dearrow)
  7. Link directly to the video source and not for example an embedded video in an article or tracked sharing link.
  8. Duplicate posts may be removed

Note: bans may apply to both [email protected] and [email protected]

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 17 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 10 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Wtf what a horrible made up bullshit of those "officials"

[–] wildcardology 8 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

I think the officials overreacted, I understand that rabies is a nasty fatal disease. But the euthanasia is completely unnecessary. The officials say it's to determine that the animals don't have rabies after peanut bit one of them. If the animals turned out negative for rabies then it means no danger, if positive the only thing they can do is vaccinate the worker, there's nothing else they can do but wait. Why not just vaccinate the worker and let the animals live?

Also sheltered animals are in no danger of having rabies unless they are bitten by a rabid animal outside.

[–] [email protected] 26 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

You cant test for rabies without euthanasing the animal.

"...to rule out rabies, the test must include a full cross-section of tissue from both the brain stem and cerebellum." - https://www.cdc.gov/rabies/php/laboratories/diagnostic.html

He had just taken in a raccoon so the squirrel could have gotten it from that, and they don't know if the owner had been lying about taking it outside.

This is all the owner's fault for not taking the squirrel to a proper animal sanctuary.

[–] wildcardology 4 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Let me ask you this. If the animal is tested as rabid. What's the next step for the bitten?

[–] [email protected] 12 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

If a animal is tested positive the human have to undergo about 2-4 vaccinations that might need to be repeated and will cost a great amount, or they die. The vaccination has a lot of side effects.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 weeks ago

It doesn’t have any more potential side effects than any other vaccine. It’s not special in this regard.

[–] wildcardology -5 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

So the euthanasia step is really not needed and just go straight to the vaccination part.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Sure, that makes sense for a country with socialized health care. You still shouldn't keep wild animals as pets.

[–] wildcardology 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Hmmm, in my country rabies vaccine cost more or less $20 a jab.

Still what they did was PETA level cruel.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Yeah, well in the US of A it costs up to 500 dollars per shot, and you need at least four.

I blame P'nut's death on the owner.

[–] FrostyCaribou 3 points 2 weeks ago

Consise and correct information. Thanks for sharing and explaining the reasoning for the actions taken.

[–] wildcardology 3 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

Nah, I blame the Karen that reported the Instagram account. Peanut would still be alive if not for her envy that peanut has more followers than her.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)
[–] wildcardology 1 points 2 weeks ago

Yeah, because she's a meddling little bitch.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 weeks ago

he had the thing for 7 years. if it had rabies it would have died already.

[–] kalkulat 5 points 2 weeks ago

All pets were at one time wildlife. Killing one to save it... wow.

[–] LustyArgonianMana 2 points 2 weeks ago

They provoked the bite. You should see the video of how they ransacked his room and house to get the squirrel. It was likely terrifying for anyone, let alone a tiny prey animal. Most people familiar with proper wildlife handling should be able to put a little fat pet squirrel in a cage. That it bit them was their fault.

Whether it's justified that both the raccoon and the squirrel were put down - imo, not really, no. Laws allow for it, but it's very unlikely squirrels have rabies and again the bite was provoked.

But also, didn't we all watch Tiger King? Can we stop giving these influencers views who use animals like props for money? It's disgusting. It's also gross when it's a disabled person or a child.