Coronavirus on chilled salmon may be infectious for over a week

[Klaralven]

A team of Chinese researchers has found the coronavirus that causes Covid-19 can survive for more than a week on the surface of chilled fresh salmon, raising implications that it could be a source of international transmission.

The experiment discovered that the virus remained infectious for eight days after being kept at a temperature of 4 degrees Celsius. The experiment also found that Sars-CoV-2, the official name for the virus, remained infectious on the salmon for two days at 25 degrees, which the researchers called “regular room temperature”.

Salmon is typically kept at 4 degrees in markets, restaurants and during transport, extending the virus’s lifespan by six days. High-quality salmon can be moved across the world in a matter of days. For instance, Chile’s fishing authority said last year that salmon could reach Shanghai in two-and-a-half days.

“Under such condition, (coronavirus) contaminated fish from one country can be easily transported to another country within one week, thus serving as one of the sources for international transmission,” said the Chinese scientists led by Dr Dai Manman in a non-peer-reviewed paper published in biorxiv.org on Monday.

“This calls for strict inspection or detection of (the coronavirus) as a critical new protocol in fish importation and exportation before allowing sales.”

https://www.scmp.com/news/china/science/article/3100637/coronavirus-chilled-salmon-may-be-infectious-over-week

[hedda_foil]

1. If the surface of refrigerated salmon can keep the virus alive for a week, so can any fresh meat.

Think about the amount of C19 in workers at all those meat packing plants.

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

2. Hmmm.

Everything else I've read indicated that the virus simply does not survive on surfaces.

You also need to ask how exactly would the virus get on the said chilled salmon? An infected processor who coughs and sneezes all over it? How often is that happening? Or is the virus once again getting loose in China in other ways, and they want to be able to blame other countries for this happening?

Note that this is not a peer reviewed paper.

I'm thinking there needs to be a lot more study. If the virus were surviving and remaining on refrigerated surfaces, wouldn't there have been an obvious spike in people eating meat that comes from the packing plants in this country that have had infected workers? But there hasn't been. We're getting the spikes from things like Sturgis and schools reopening.

[Klaralven]

9. Meat is normally cooked, which would kill the coronavirus. Salmon is used for sushi, however.

Last weekend, I didn't handle it much, washed my hands, and baked it in a 400 degrees F oven to an internal temp over 145, so I'm not too worried.

I wouldn't handle the fish and then touch my nose or rub my eyes, though.

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

12. Ahh. I don't eat raw fish myself.

[Klaralven]

15. Also from South China Morning Post

[LisaL]

16. I don't know where you've read this.

Studies show sars cov 2 can survive on surfaces for days.

[NutmegYankee]

18. To limited exents.

While scientists could find the RNA on some surfaces up to 17 days later, the virus was no longer able to infect a host. On natural material surfaces, like cardboard at room temp, 99% is "dead" in 8 hours. And the amount of virus is believed to be low, such that it may not be enough "viral load" to achieve an active infection. The risk of catching COVID-19 from a surface isn't zero, but it's also not the most likely transmission path. The greatest surface risk is frozen foods, where the virus can survive for prolonged periods of time.

I usually leave my nonperishable groceries for 3 days and then put them away. Items for the fridge/freezer get wiped first.

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

27. They can find the genetic material for some period of time on surfaces.

That's not the same as you can get the disease by touching any of those surfaces. Honest, it's not.

In fact, there's pretty much no evidence of anyone getting the disease by handling something. Or eating food that supposedly was contaminated. You get it by breathing in droplets containing the virus.

I keep on being reminded of how students taking bacteriology do the lab where they run around and swab everything they can think of and then cultivate the swabs in the lab. Often they are horrified to discover everything is teeming with bacteria. We live in a microbial world.

And again, this is one non peer reviewed study. It's actually the kind of irresponsible medical reporting that happens all the time, such as "Research promises a cure for This Disease" which is some study of something in the lab, usually something to do with something kill cells or bacteria or viruses of This Disease and isn't even close to animal trials, let alone human trials. Or "This Food reduces This Uncommon Cancer" by 50%, which even if that's true (and it probably isn't really) it reduces your odds of getting that uncommon cancer from .05% to .025%, which while a real reduction, your risk for that cancer is already so low that it's not really meaningful.

Or back to another way to think about this: If people were getting the disease from viruses left on surfaces, even more people would have gotten it by now. But what we have are people doing stupid things like crowding in bars, maskless, going back to college and attending student parties maskless. People often don't wear masks properly like under their nose or pulling it down to talk, or wear ones that are ineffective, like those oh so clever neck gaiters, and honestly have no idea they're doing anything wrong.

Sanitizing everything all the time is not the answer to this virus. I'm becoming resigned to thinking this will finally end when everyone on the planet has finally gotten it and either died or recovered. Clearly that's going to take many, many years, but it may turn out to be the only solution.

[brush]

3. Better specify if that's celsius or fahrenheit.

25 degrees room temp doesn't sound like fahrenheit, which is what most Americans go by.

[Klaralven]

8. It is Celsius, the temperature scale used by almost the entire world except for the US.

[former9thward]

4. What BS

Let's have some actual science and actual cases of transmission.

[Freethinker65]

6. +1

[Freethinker65]

5. I was under the impression food is pretty safe to consume

I thought viral load was thought to be a big factor in becoming infected with COVID-19.

[underpants]

7. I'm hungry. Mmmmm let's do an experiment with salmon.

Hell yes. Sounds great.

[GulfCoast66]

10. I'm calling BS. On the study. Not the poster.

In a lab it is possible to find anything you are looking for. I know. Been there.

But there have been few if any cases caused by the virus on food. None I have read about.

And if you cook your food it is all academic.

If you eat your salmon raw, is I prefer, your stomach acid will take care of a few stray viruses.

Covid is a respiratory virus. Not a food born illness.

Salmonella is a much larger danger.

Practice proper kitchen sanitation practices and you will be fine.

[Baitball Blogger]

11. Which is why you should wash the meat, fish or chicken before you prepare it for cooking.

[LisaL]

17. Actually that can spread germs around in your kitchen.

"Don't wash your raw chicken!" the government organization tweeted. "Washing can spread germs from the chicken to other food or utensils in the kitchen."

https://www.today.com/food/should-you-rinse-raw-chicken-ina-garten-debunks-cooking-myth-t125376

[Baitball Blogger]

20. That is seriously demented.

I rinse mine in the sink, pat it dry and prepare it right away. Never has been a problem.

[cbdo2007]

22. Some chicken HAS to be washed...Costco puts theirs in a sulfer smelling brine that

stinks up the whole kitchen. We thought all the chicken was spoiled but after some research it is the syrupy liquid it comes in that makes it smell terrible, so we have to wash that off before cooking. Most other places though with fresh chicken, yes no need to wash/rinse it anyways.

[canetoad]

13. Damn

I was planning Coronavirus on chilled salmon for Sunday's entree.

[malaise]

19. Hehehehehhe

[soothsayer]

14. Don't forget NZ is investigating whether cold storage could be a culprit

Covid-19 Mystery: How Did the Coronavirus Return to New Zealand?
Authorities have traced the virus to a worker in a cold-storage warehouse, but they can’t figure out how he got it

https://www.wsj.com/articles/coronavirus-outbreak-flummoxes-new-zealandeveryone-is-anxious-11597743005


New Zealand baffled by new COVID-19 cases, eyes frozen-food packaging
Experts says frozen goods unlikely source as health officials race to investigate.

https://arstechnica.com/science/2020/08/new-zealand-baffled-by-new-covid-19-cases-eyes-frozen-food-packaging/

[Hugin]

21. I suspect this is true of any 'chilled surface'.

Ala, the winter or so-called second spike.

Freezing any organic substance preserves it... Especially, if it's not really alive to begin with such as a virus.

[Klaralven]

23. I think it depends on surface chemistry as well as temperature

For example, the coronavirus lasts much longer on non-reactive stainless steel than it does on more reactive copper surfaces.

Coronavirus has a lipid shell. Since salmon is an oily fish, this is probably an ideal environment for the virus to survive in.

[Hugin]

26. The virus surviving in any environment is relative to that environment.

Sitting on cold dead salmon is probably a pretty happy place for a microbe.

Worst survival case is floating around in a bottle of pure Lysol or bleach under pressure in intense full-spectrum UV light at 192 F and best case safely ensconced in a frozen blob of mucus on a surface of 24 K gold. (Which, in this state, it could probably remain viable indefinitely. Meaning, forever in layman's terms.)

What I've seen very little of is a discussion of how high of an inoculate dose of the virus is required to cause an infection and what viral load is needed to exceed the immune response in a typical human. Also, relative, I'm sure.

How big is the virus? Since the disease is aerosol, how fine of a filtration is needed to clean it out of the air and how much needs to be cleaned?

Having some idea of these levels would govern the amount of sterilization and cleaning required to maintain our living environment at what is needed to remain free of a potential infection with some confidence.

I've thought about this quite a bit recently. But, this is at the core of why wearing a mask is effective.

[Klaralven]

28. The lack of inoculate dose information is disturbing

I haven't been able to find anything useful on that topic.

What has been studied is the production of droplets and aerosols by talking, singing, laughing, shouting, coughing, sneezing etc. There have been a number of studies on the distribution of drop sizes, how long they stay suspended, how far they travel under various conditions of air conditioning and air currents. In general, they indicate that the 6 foot guideline is only a very rough estimate of a relatively safe distance. It was also set early on, based on old studies of droplet spread diseases, and hasn't been modified to take new studies into account.

So indoors, one should keep their mask on, whether or not they are 6 feet away from others or not.

It would also help if restaurants would put in sound deadening materials so that patrons would not talk so loudly.

[dalton99a]

24. South China Morning Post has a tendency to sensationalize bullshit science

https://www.scmp.com/news/china/science/article/3074351/coronavirus-can-travel-twice-far-official-safe-distance-and-stay
Coronavirus can travel twice as far as official ‘safe distance’ and stay in air for 30 minutes, Chinese study finds
Stephen Chen in Beijing
Published: 10:44pm, 9 Mar, 2020

This 'study' was retracted and SCMP never corrected their article

[Klaralven]

25. That article was probably retracted due to CCP pressure, not because the science was wrong.

https://retractionwatch.com/2020/04/22/study-claiming-broader-spread-of-aerosolized-coronavirus-is-retracted/