General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region Forumscan't dogs get the virus or, at least, be a way to carry the germs?
Just like we cant catch HIV from a feline-HIV positive cat.
Duppers
(28,117 posts)Sentath
(2,243 posts)And fur is just another (complicated) surface to sanitize.
FailureToCommunicate
(14,006 posts)bit of comfort dog time, they'll be fine.
Duppers
(28,117 posts)
The World Health Organization currently advises that there is no evidence to suggest that dogs or cats can be infected with the new coronavirus.
https://vetmed.illinois.edu/pet_column/coronavirus-pets/
FailureToCommunicate
(14,006 posts)petting it? Virus can be deposited on ANY surface. And experts say that while it somewhat harder to get the virus transferred off of soft surfaces like dog or cat hair, paper bags, cardboard, fuzzy gloves, etc than off of hard surfaces like a handrail, but still, it's possible.
That was my only point for the comment above.
And yes, I know that wasn't the point of the picture anyway.
Duppers
(28,117 posts)My apologies. 🙏
FailureToCommunicate
(14,006 posts)safeinOhio
(32,632 posts)As always.
Our little ankle bitter is always between his mom and the door. Not me, but always mom.
kimbutgar
(21,040 posts)I am still seething over that statement.
Totally Tunsie
(10,885 posts)It's been found that bacteria can get trapped in rings, and hand-washing often misses it.
https://www.insider.com/coronavirus-stop-wearing-weddings-rings-watches-experts-say-2020-3
Hand sanitizer could also be less effective if you wear rings. A 2003 study found that nurses who wore rings and applied hand sanitizer, used sanitizer wipes, or washed their hands with antimicrobial soap had more bacteria on their hands afterwards than those who didn't wear rings and did the same hygiene procedures.
catbyte
(34,326 posts)She probably has a stash in her locker from all those boxes she stole from the supply closet.