Köi-Lö $##$$@$##$$.#$$ wrote in
:

would be rather unlikely. Where would that midge or mosquito have had
a chance to bite or come in contact with a diseased fish? Has it been

Again, you're being short sighted. A contagion or a contaminant does not
have to originate from a fish to affect a fish. As I said before there are
plenty of parasites (e.g. any number of digenetic trematodes) and viral
diseases that use secondary hosts in order to infect tertiary hosts--a
secondary host could be something like a bird or a rodent.


Nothing is "perfectly safe." Even the pellets and flakes you buy at
the store can be contaminated with insecticides. They can be rancid

The most dangerous products in packaged foods are the preservatives.

So you're changing your statement now. My point with my previous post was
that your statement to the original poster that if food hasn't touched a
sick fish it is harmless is completely false and illogical. Whether or not
it touched a sick fish or not is hardly an issue. Pathogens may be present
in wild foods regardless of where you have collected them. Even if the
mosquito larva had been in close contact with a sick fish it is unlikely
that would change the propensity for transmission to another fish as most
diseases involving multiple species have a much more complex and involved
method of transmission.

In most circumstances a healthy and un-stressed animal has the ability to
resist most of these wild pathogens without manifesting symptoms, but that
does not mean that they do not exist if you don't see your pet food bumping
into sick animals.