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]