The Himalayan civet, a catlike mammal, was thrust into the limelight recently when new research identified it as a possible source of SARS. The findings led local authorities to issue urgent directives on dealing with captive civet cats destined for zoos or the dinner plate.

But while reports on civet cats continue to hit the headlines, a group of medical experts have cautioned that it is too early to say whether SARS (severe acute respiratory syndrome) comes directly from the animals.

Joint research by two institutes in Shenzhen of Guangdong Province and Hong Kong found that the SARS-like coronavirus detected in civet cats shares 99.8 per cent of the genetic code of the human SARS coronavirus.

Ever since this news was released last weekend, the public seems to have been convinced that civet cats are transmitting SARS to humans.

Some medical experts have pointed out that many questions about the transmission route remained unanswered. These include: Was the virus in civet cats transmitted directly to humans, or via other animals? Are these the only mammals carrying such a virus? The first reported SARS patient in the country, although a chef, had no direct contact with any wild animal.

Obviously, further research and more tests are needed before the source of SARS is conclusively identified, the experts insist.

Such voices of reason are welcome amid the clamour to applaud the latest research "breakthrough."

The arguments of cautious scientists demonstrate their sense of responsibility and are badly needed in the battle to combat the mystery disease SARS.

A range of views aired will save us from unnecessary mistakes and encourage scientists to take a rational and prudent attitude in their work.

Editor: Liao Ming