Well, SARS *IS* unlike influenza and bacterial sinus infections:
different type of organism.  Just because something is a lung infection
doesn't mean that the infecting organisms are alike.
 
I *DO* agree that it is likely that ferrets can be infected with it;
after all, a very wide range of animals in Carnivora can so I find it
no surprise that they can and that cats can, nor would I find it any
surprise at all if domestic dogs and any number of wild members of
Carnivora can.
 
The part of the study which is *NOT* well supported by the methodology
or the results is the second part saying that the cats and ferrets were
able to infect other cats and ferrets.  Experts at WHO and CDC said that
simple mechanical brushing together could cause the results seen in that
part of the study, and with the ferrets the necropsies showed results
that are inconsistent with SARS, which left me wondering if perhaps
they had an ECE contamination or something else going on, and if they
considered the idea of contamination with an alternative coronavirus like
ECE.  The ferrets in the second part did not have SARS lung damage but
had emaciation and fatty livers.
 
I'd personally like to know a great deal more about techniques used and
about any other health aspects of the animals used -- and I'd like to see
the study itself commented upon by those with a good deal more knowledge
than I have.
[Posted in FML issue 4318]