Peanut, who has amassed more than half a million Instagram followers, was euthanized by officials to be tested for rabies.

Peanut, the Instagram-famous squirrel that was seized from its owner’s home Wednesday, has been euthanized by New York state officials.

The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation took Peanut, as well as a raccoon named Fred, on Wednesday after the agency learned the animals were “sharing a residence with humans, creating the potential for human exposure to rabies," it said in a joint statement with the Chemung County Department of Health.

Both Peanut and Fred were euthanized to test for rabies, the statement said. It was unclear when the animals were euthanized.

  • ZeroTHM@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    21 hours ago

    Ridiculous and wholly unnecessary government overreach. Every official that touched this should be fired and publicly dragged through the mud.

      • Todd Bonzalez@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        12 hours ago

        If rabies ever “manifests” itself in a human being (a person experiences symptoms), there is a 99% fatality rate. In fact, only 15 people worldwide have ever recovered following the onset of symptoms, albeit with extensive brain damage.

        Rabies really is a “magical” disease. Once it makes it to your brain, the blood-brain barrier protects it from any medicinal treatment possible. Your only chance is for your own immune system to defeat the infection, and again, that has only happened 15 times ever.

    • InverseParallax@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      20 hours ago

      OK, we have very serious, and honestly, pants-shittingly paranoid responses to rabies for a really good fucking reason:

      If you show symptoms, you are dead. Period. And not a nice death.

      When I was young, you saw a wild dog, lot of people would reach for their rifle, it was just their reflex.

      Maybe we have to update the laws, but they are there for a reason, and one of those reasons is why we don’t have too many rabies deaths in this country, and we are still considered one of the countries with high risk of rabies.

      Tl;Dr - don’t fuck with rabies.

      • joel_feila@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        19 hours ago

        They put the animals in isolation and re turn them when they are cleared. I know they can that’s what happened to my neighbor’s dog after it bit someone.

        • Todd Bonzalez@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          12 hours ago

          Well, a dog is a lower risk animal than wildlife. This was a poorly socialized squirrel that bit someone, and had potentially been in contact with hundreds of other animals at an animal sanctuary. The squirrel and the raccoon aren’t legally pets in NY, and no effort was made to make them legal educational animals. From the standpoint of public health policy, what went down was pretty much by-the-books. The only way to test for rabies is to run tests on brain tissue. There isn’t a “famous TikTok Animal” exception to the rules that protect us from rabies outbreaks.

        • InverseParallax@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          19 hours ago

          They do that for dogs, cats and ferrets.

          Dogs, cats and ferrets

          Following rabies exposure, unvaccinated dogs, cats, and ferrets should be euthanized since no licensed biologics can ensure that they do not develop rabies. If the owner declines, dogs and cats need a strict 4-month quarantine, and ferrets need strict 6-month quarantine. They also need immediate rabies vaccination. Demonstrating an adequate serological response to vaccination may result in health officials reducing the quarantine period. Quarantine should be conducted in a secure facility that ensures people and other animals do not become exposed.

          Other mammals

          Other mammals should be euthanized immediately.

          https://www.cdc.gov/rabies/hcp/veterinarians/index.html

          We do not know how long rabies incubates in all animals, and they do NOT FUCK AROUND WITH THIS!!!

          I spoke to vets, their faces go to stone when rabies exposure seriously comes up, this is not a disease, it is a literal nightmare, the worst zombie scenario you can imagine made reality.

          It tears apart your mind completely and there is no treatment at all. Your family gets to watch.

          This is just nothing to fuck with.

  • JovialMicrobial@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 days ago

    That guy sucks for keeping wild animals without the proper certification and training resulting in no medical care for the animals.

    At the same time I’m also skeptical of how the state handled it because I feel it’s important to remember that policies and how situations are handled can always use improvement.

    For example, how did the investigator get bitten? Were they wearing proper protective gear and following procedure? Was he or she properly trained to detain animals like a squirrel? If the state is going to send people to confiscate wild animals a bite incident is a big fucking deal and there should be an internal investigation as to how that happened. For both the future safety of the employees and animals.

    This whole situation sucks.

  • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 days ago

    The statement said one of the officials involved in the investigation into Peanut and Fred was bitten by the squirrel.

    Sorry but they no real choice on this one. Vaccines can and should be administered immediately to any human bitten by an animal in all cases, but vaccines are not full-proof and the animals must be tested. The only method to test for rabies is removal of brain tissue.

    Just because a wild animal is docile to some humans or has its own social media account does not mean they are pets and they should never have been in this situation unless the property owner was a certified rescue and rehab.

      • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        19 hours ago

        But you cannot test for rabies without killing the animal. Rabies infections spread up the nervous system to the brain in hours, not weeks.

        The animal bit a human, at that point nothing could be done.

        • angrystego@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          18 hours ago

          You can vaccinate the bitten human right away without any test, which is how it’s really done. Waiting for test results is not a good idea. If the vaccine didn’t work (it does work if administered in time), then there would be no help for the person. Testing is unnecessary.

          • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            18 hours ago

            You always get vaccinated for an animal bite immediately no matter what. There are additional doses and close observation for confirmed cases.

    • laverabe@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      20 hours ago

      but vaccines are not foolproof

      Yes they are. Only pointing out so there is not unnecessary fear spread about rabies. It is 100% preventable before or after exposure.

      Does the rabies vaccine work? The rabies vaccine works remarkably well. Studies indicate that if the vaccine is given immediately and appropriately to someone who was bitten by a rabid animal, it is 100 percent effective.

      https://www.chop.edu/vaccine-education-center/vaccine-details/rabies-vaccine

    • buttfarts@lemy.lol
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 day ago

      I don’t think the government needed to get involved. If this guy was hoarding animals then okay. He had a squirrel and the gov’t killed it? Thank you gov’t I really feel safer now knowing you killed this guy’s squirrel.

      • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 day ago

        He had two wild animals, the first one for at least 7 years, and was making income from them without ever getting certification to house them. These rules exist to protect people and animals from harm.

        The Guv’ment doesn’t just break in and trash the place, kill the animals, for shits and giggles. I’m sure they would much rather be somewhere else far away from this shitshow. Blaming the inspector is victim blaming.

    • The dude had started getting his certification seeing as the squirrel didn’t want to return to nature and had become domesticated when the raid happened. The owner wanted to be in line with the law, but that apparently just put a giant flag on him. Also, do they have to conduct a surprise raid instead of just approaching the guy and attempting to be civil with him? I saw no information that a civil approach was taken.

  • 𝓔𝓶𝓶𝓲𝓮@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    My squirrel moment. Kill these heartless bureaucratic fuckers. It is a human filth that doesn’t belong to the civilised world

    • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 days ago

      Unfortunately the animal bit a person, so they had no real choice in the matter. There is no reliable way to test for rabies without killing the animal, and vaccines are not guaranteed to prevent spreading infection.

        • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 days ago

          AFAIK no, just the squirrel is confirmed, if I were in charge I would have quarantined Fred to look for signs of sickness and then shipping it to a proper rescue.

          • eyes@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 days ago

            Unfortunately quarantine and observation isn’t effective as a testing strategy for animals, the disease can progress at different rates and it’s possible for infected animals to show no symptoms. As rabies can’t be treated after symptoms start showing, they can’t take the time to do this.

      • KyuubiNoKitsune@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        This is such fucking bullshit, so you corner an animal, it bites you, then you shoot the animal because it bit you?

        I hope you never own or work with animals.

        • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          2 days ago

          No, you surgically remove the animal’s brain tissue to test for rabies and ascertain whether more serious treatment is required for the bitten. It should also be noted that the animals were never vaccinated themselves, because even if a provider were in the area the man with the animals was never certified as a rescue and rehab after seven years.

          Handing over the animals safely and with minimal harm would be the handlers responsibility, the inspector being bitten is the fault of the handler.

    • buttfarts@lemy.lol
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 day ago

      This would be my villain origin story when they are talking about “what drove him to commit atrocities”

    • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 days ago

      TBH this really shouldn’t radicalize you. This is what people are supposed to do when an animal bites somebody. The thing that was done incorrectly was creating a situation where an animal could bite a person.

      • buttfarts@lemy.lol
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 day ago

        Maybe the squirrel bit that guy because the squirrel knew deep down that guy was here to fuck up the squirrels life which he did by inserting himself into the situation.

        • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 day ago

          Maybe creating that squirrel’s situation was wrong and the handler could have taken steps to prevent an animal attack on the inspector, such as a pen or harness?

      • piecat@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 day ago

        They caused the animal to bite, they kinda deserve it, no?

        Besides, they probably got vaccinated for rabies regardless? That’s the only thing you can do…

        • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 day ago

          The bite is the fault of the handler and not the inspector.

          The inspector probably did get vaccinated, the animal almost certainly never has, but vaccine isn’t guaranteed to work so to know if they need to be held longer or receive an additional inoculation they need to take a sample from the animal.

          • PyroNeurosis@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            10 hours ago

            Someone else mentioned the lack of PPE when going to handle Peanut, so that’s definitely a strike against the inspector.

            But more to the point, why was Fred euthanized? He didn’t bite anyone!

            • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              9 hours ago

              Yeah fr the euthanization of Fred is definite grounds for lawsuit.

              As for PPE, I feel like its possible the inspector was unaware of the location of Peanut or perhaps the handle created a situation where an attack was likely, given it roams his home in the videos and he isnt certified.

              I could be wrong, though, maybe an inspector really was stupid enough to find the squirrel in a cage, open it, and try to yank it out.

  • rotten@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 days ago

    This is what government does. It finds you breaking some arbitrary rule and makes the worst possible outcome for all parties involved. Then they pretend and act like it’s for your own good.

    Squirrels don’t normally carry rabies. There were plenty of other options.

    • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 days ago

      There were no other options, imo. The inspector who was bitten likely did get a vaccine immediately, but vaccines are not guaranteed to work. There is no reliable way to test an animal for rabies without killing it.

      These rules exist to help people and animals, and law enforcement followed them all to the letter.

        • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          20 hours ago

          Treatment for the initial exposure should at least delay spreading infection until the results of the test at specialized facilities comes back between 24 and 72 hours after euthanization, but a positive test means repeated treatments on a strict schedule will be necessary. You cannot just continuously treat everyone for rabies all the time but you also cannot just wait 10 days of quarantine to see if the animal shows symptoms, and especially with rodents because they might never show symptoms at all.

          This is how the world works. Rabies sucks, but this is how we deal with it.

          • Strawberry@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            15 hours ago

            I completely agree, my friend. One time a toddler bit my dog so I had the police come and shoot him. Luckily the toddler did not have rabies, so we did not have to do the extended treatment for my dog.

    • mhague@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 days ago

      Yes but government is ultimately good and does much good. Our politicians are mostly good (there’s 500,000+) because it’s people like us standing up to work policy. The idea that our government is innately bad and that it’s just bad people doing bad things is so tiring.

    • CeeBee_Eh@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 days ago

      Squirrels don’t normally carry rabies.

      While not impossible, it’s actually considered near impossible by experts. For whatever reason, smaller mammals seem to simply not be affected by rabies.

      • RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 days ago

        Because they generally die before they infect others. They absolutely can get rabies. I have never seen anyone say it’s “near impossible” except pro-wild-animals-as-pets “experts”.

        • CeeBee_Eh@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 days ago

          Because they generally die before they infect others.

          And as a result rabies within small mammals populations are non-existent, because there’s no spread vector.

          I could have worded it better, but the point still stands. Many years ago there was a squirrel in my back yard that was foaming at the mouth and I called it in to an official line that dealt with that kind of stuff. They told me flat out “it’s not rabies” and explained why. That’s when I did a deep dive into rabies and small animals. Every single source says “it can happen, but almost never does”.

          In my case with the squirrel, the person explained to me that in the part of the country I lived in there has never been a record of a squirrel or similar rodent with a case of rabies. And it wasn’t showing any other signs, and it’s “foamy” mouth went away after a bit.

          So yes, “near impossible” isn’t the same as “entirely impossible” and also considers more than just the biological possibility of the infection.

  • Mac@mander.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 days ago

    Wild squirrels are not legal pets in NY—not that the legality necessitates this cruel outcome.

    • ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 days ago

      Oh no. It was against the law so they killed it.

      There’s like 14 states where you are allowed to own them. Just because there’s a law, doesn’t mean it’s a good one. You sound like the guy who’d narc of a black kid in the 1950’s for drinking from the white kid fountain at the park “cause it was against the law”.

      • rickyrigatoni@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 days ago

        Wild animals carry diseases and can frequently exhibit unpredictable aggressive behaviors even when handled by a seasoned professional. These laws are necessary for the safety of both people and the ecosystem.

        • ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 days ago

          Yeah…I hear about all these squirrel deaths and squirrel diseases and rabies issues from squirrels in the 14 states it’s legal to own in…

          • StupidBrotherInLaw@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 day ago

            “I’ve never heard about it, so clearly it’s not a problem”.

            Just because you’re ignorant doesn’t mean it’s not dangerous. People like you are exactly why we have laws like this - you’re not bright enough to understand why it’s a bad idea, so we have laws to protect the rest of us from your stupidity.

            • ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              22 hours ago

              Yet once again, it’s completely legal in 1/3 of the country. Beyond that not a single case of rabies has EVER been documented from a squirrel in the United states. There’s literally no reason for a squirrel to be not kept as a pet for health reasons (not arguing “wild animal reasons”) and it’s not even a recommendation to get a rabies shot after a squirrel bite unless the squirrel was acting very strangely. Conversely, dogs have a much higher chance of having rabies. Further, rats have a higher likelihood of carrying any diseases that squirrels could potentially spread, and rats are allowed as pets everywhere.

              So the only one ignorant of things is the guy here talking like the law existing means there must be a good reason for it, without actually understanding anything. Check your own ignorance.

  • its_prolly_fine@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 days ago

    Okay, I was initially totally against the DEC but reading the article really changed my mind. You need a license to own wild animals in NY. Ya know cause they should not be pets… also wildlife rehabilitation requires a license and training. Also rehabilitating means returning them to the wild. Not to mention an extra license and training for animals that are common carriers of rabies.

    He has a squirrel for 7 years as a pet without a license with zero intention to rehabilitate his animals. He was using them to make money. Getting them to do tricks, wear hats and clothes. He essentially had a roadside zoo, but his costumers were online. He says he was in the process of getting a license. He had the squirrel for 7 years, and was actively collecting more animals. This guy sucks, no wonder people were reporting him.

      • its_prolly_fine@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        9 hours ago

        Yea, when it’s a tiger its bad but when its a squirrel it’s ok. Plus big cat rescue (Carroll Baskins rescue) actually has licenses, State organizations regularly send seized animals to them, and they have an active program to rehabilitate wild bobcats.

        • JackbyDev@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          8 hours ago

          This is so true. I actually went there before Tiger King even aired. They were very transparent that their organization used to breed tigers and rent them for TV/advertisement usage. But in Tiger King they just show this crazy man ranting about how “She used to do this too, she’s just the same as us!” But like, they’re not fucking hiding it. They literally told us on the tour how they realized that doing things like using big cats for advertising brands (think like leopard in a high end jewelry ad, for example) just sort of drives people to view them as pets and seek them out. And whether folks agree or disagree with that isn’t really the point, my point is that BCR (even before Tiger King) was wildly transparent about their history and their transformation/changing of opinions over the years.

          It actually sort of makes me angry with the documentary makers. Like I’m definitely upset with media illiterate folks only getting “Carol Baskin killed her husband” because Joe Exotic wouldn’t shut up about it. But like… Joe literally tried to hire a hitman. And that’s not a theory or a guess. He did it. And folks just eauate them. But the film makers didn’t really do a good job covering this aspect about BCR’s transparency. It just feels irresponsible to me I guess. There’s more but it’s not fresh in my mind any longer. I wanna say there was some stuff about people they interviewed that was weird. Like I think Carol’s husband’s old secretary that got replaced tried to steal or something? I don’t remember. But they just don’t include that context.

          • its_prolly_fine@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            8 hours ago

            Oh yeah, that fucking show was bullshit. For whatever reason they decided Carole made a better “bad guy”. Even though she was actually a victim, and they lied to her about the direction the show was going in. Even though her life story seems to be amazing. The things she has survived and is still making it her life’s mission to help big cats, it’s just awe inspiring.

    • andros_rex@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 days ago

      A wildlife rehabilitator (Nessie) on TikTok pointed out that his squirrel and his raccoon would not have had access to veterinary care (ie, vaccination for rabies).

      She also pointed out that showcasing wildlife in social media is currently unregulated - in person exhibitions requiring an expensive license to get. This is a bit of a loophole, and what that guy did is likely to get that loophole closed up, and impact sanctuaries that do operate within the current law while using social media platforms to fundraise.

      Also, personally, the way he showcased the animals just seemed inappropriate - squirrels eating human food just seems problematic. Iirc he ran a domestic rescue, not a wildlife rescue, which is a different skill set. Wildlife rescuers avoid interacting with animals as much as possible. Animals aren’t toys and don’t have the same kinds of needs we do, and the fact they are cute shouldn’t complicate our emotions.

      • its_prolly_fine@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 day ago

        Social media is unregulated but owning them isn’t. He needed a license to keep them, which he didn’t have. And the “sanctuary” is just for domestics that was started last year. The website sells t shirts and options for donations. It seems like they got internet famous because of the squirrel and opened this as a way to make money.

        • andros_rex@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          23 hours ago

          Yeah - the more I look into it, the less sympathetic I am. There’s a lot of good reasons to have regulations for wildlife. A lot of “common sense” is just wrong (like the “mother birds abandon babies because of human scent”), and sometimes that gets animals killed unnecessarily. Folks assume because they know how to deal with a cat or a dog that squirrels and raccoons will be similar - they aren’t.

          Legitimate wildlife rescues with ambassador animals don’t typically present them as pets. An animal being unreleasable is a fail state. A legitimate rescue will be trying to make the most out of a bad situation. When I’ve talked to keepers or watched vids online, they understand it as tragic that the animal will not be able to live its life independently - the fact that they can make money because people like getting to see cute animals is just trying to get something good out of it.

          Squirrels aren’t domestic. They aren’t supposed to live with us.

          [I’m not a wildlife expert, but I’ve shoveled shit as a volunteer at lots of different types of refuges and have chatted with many of the types of folks who run these places]

    • Catoblepas@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      I feel like I’m going nuts, is nobody on lemmy actually reading this article? This dude turbo sucked.

      Longo brought Peanut him home, ultimately caring for the squirrel for eight months before trying to release it back into the wild. He said Peanut returned to his porch a day and a half later with a broken bone sticking out of its tail, at which point Longo determined Peanut couldn’t survive in the wild alone and instead would move in with him.

      Didn’t get him veterinary care though, because that would have resulted in his Cool Pet being taken away. What’s wrong with a little risk of sepsis and zero pain control for a serious injury if someone really, really wants to be a special boy??

      • catloaf@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 days ago

        Few people read the article. That takes extra clicks, time, and effort. People like to read the headline and work off assumptions.

    • distantsounds@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 days ago

      I read the article and can’t believe someone could read the same thing and come away thinking, “this guys sucks.”

      • Cypher@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 days ago

        You can’t believe people would be angry that someone illegally kept an animal an forced it to perform for his own profit?

        You must be really unfamiliar with the history of animals in circus performances.

        • CmdrShepard42@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 days ago

          This would apply to anyone uploading a picture or video of their pet, no? All those pictures of sleeping cats today are coming from people forcing their pets to perform for their own profit. They even came up with a cute name to disguise this disgusting exploitation and indentured servitude: “caturday.”

          It makes me sick.

          • JackbyDev@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            14 hours ago

            In general, I would suspect most folks uploading cat pics have their cat legally and hopefully have them vaccinated for rabies. Two pretty big differences lol.

            • CmdrShepard42@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              9 hours ago

              Everyone is really leaning on the legality aspect as if that determines the morality of keeping a squirrel as a pet or posting said pet on social media.

              Also, how is this squirrel going to be infected with rabies after living indoors for 7 years? By everyone’s measure here, every squirrel should be euthanized since any one of them could potentially have rabies at any time under any circumstances, and they all live in close proximity to humans.

              • JackbyDev@programming.dev
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                8 hours ago

                Also, how is this squirrel going to be infected with rabies after living indoors for 7 years?

                How does one verify the squirrel was actually inside for 7 years after it bites them?

                • CmdrShepard42@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  7 hours ago

                  How does one verify that any mammal they come into contact with doesn’t have rabies? Apparently, it’s an epidemic, and anyone and everyone could have it.

          • its_prolly_fine@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 day ago

            He took an animal from the wild. Domesticated animals are different from wild animals. He was also still taking animals from the wild as seen by the most recent racoon he kept as a pet. Wild animals require licenses for a reason.

    • lemonmelon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 days ago

      Oh man I don’t enjoy being that guy right now but for the love of all, It’s CUSTOMERS. Costumers are people who work in dress-up.

      I’ve only seen this in the past few years, but it’s become such a common mistake. I don’t understand it.

      Sorry, I mean you’re making a salient point about the lack of a license and all. Even so, if he’s been caring for the squirrel domestically for seven years, where do they think the supposed rabies would have come from? It doesn’t just manifest.

      • azertyfun@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        23 hours ago

        Well… It’s English. Y’all’s vowels are 90 % schwa and half of the rest is completely dependent on the accent.

        “Cuh-stuh-muh”. Same vowel. If English’s spelling was to be redone, I vote for a hangul-style writing system but with the vowels only implied: kx/stx/mx.

      • its_prolly_fine@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        24 hours ago

        Naw it’s all good thanks! I’m dyslexic so I swap the vowels, I’ve always done it. Lol

        They recently obtained a raccoon. Which are one of the most common animals to get rabies. He also attempted to release the squirrel when it was 8 months old. It came back injured. It could have been infected then, rabies can lie dormant for years.

      • EndlessNightmare@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 days ago

        but it’s become such a common mistake. I don’t understand it.

        Yeah, like how common loose instead of lose, and rouge instead of rogue is.

      • MutilationWave@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        All these mistakes grind my gears, but this one is especially bad. Some of them make sense because of the way the word is pronounced.

        Who is out there saying costumers instead of customers? Nobody says it like that.

  • BigFig@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 days ago

    Disgusting, FYI yes squirrels can carry rabies, but it is extremely, I say again EXTREMELY rare, and transmission to a human via a squirrel is even MORE rare than that. Typically rabies just outright kills small rodents such as squirrels

    • catloaf@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 days ago

      Oh, in that case it’s totally fine and nothing to worry about at all.

    • Tikiporch@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 days ago

      It is rare, but it may be worth pointing out a celebrity Squirrel will have much more frequent contact with humans than a wild Squirrel.

      From reading the article, they would have been OK to keep the animals as long as they didn’t stay in the home.

    • its_prolly_fine@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 days ago

      It isn’t that the virus outright kills them. They just typically don’t get close enough to animals that could infect them. They are prey animals so they wouldn’t approach infected animals, they would run. They are also very small so the initial bite or scratch that could infect them kills them before they actually develop the disease. But a squirrel living with a raccoon because some guy thought it was cute. Yea, that would do it