Editing Chupacabra (section)

== Reputed origin ==
A five-year investigation by [[Benjamin Radford]], documented in his 2011 book ''[[Tracking the Chupacabra]]'', concluded that the description given by the original eyewitness in Puerto Rico, Madelyne Tolentino, was based on the creature Sil in the 1995 science-fiction horror film ''[[Species (film)|Species]]''.<ref name=Radford2011/> The alien creature Sil is nearly identical to Tolentino's chupacabra eyewitness account and she had seen the movie before her report: "It was a creature that looked like the chupacabra, with spines on its back and all... The resemblance to the chupacabra was really impressive", Tolentino reported.<ref>{{cite book|last=Corrales|first=Scott|title=Chupacabras and Other Mysteries|isbn=1-883729-06-8|date=September 1997|publisher=Greenleaf Publications}}</ref> Radford revealed that Tolentino "believed that the creatures and events she saw in ''Species'' were happening in reality in Puerto Rico at the time", and therefore concludes that "the most important chupacabra description cannot be trusted".<ref name=Radford2011/> This, Radford believes, seriously undermines the credibility of the chupacabra as a real animal.<ref>{{cite magazine|last=Radford|first=Benjamin|title=Slaying the Vampire: Solving the Chupacabra Mystery|magazine=[[Skeptical Inquirer]]|volume=35|issue=3|date=May 2011|pages=45–48|url=https://skepticalinquirer.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/29/2011/05/p45.pdf|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200827004734/https://skepticalinquirer.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/29/2011/05/p45.pdf|archive-date=27 August 2020}}</ref>

The reports of blood-sucking by the chupacabra were never confirmed by a [[Autopsy|necropsy]],<ref name=Radford2011/> the only way to conclude that the animal was drained of blood. Dr. David Morales, a Puerto Rican veterinarian with the Department of Agriculture, analyzed 300 reported victims of the chupacabra and found that they had not been bled dry.<ref name=Radford2011/>

Radford divided the chupacabra reports into two categories: the reports from [[Puerto Rico]] and [[Latin America]], where animals were attacked and it is supposed their blood was extracted; and the reports in the United States of mammals, mostly dogs and [[coyote]]s with mange, that people call "chupacabra" due to their unusual appearance.<ref>{{cite web|title=Chupacabra Science: How Evolution Made a Mythical Monster|url=http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2010/10/101028-chupacabra-evolution-halloween-science-monsters-chupacabras-picture/|date=28 October 2010|last=Than|first=Ker|website=National Geographic|access-date=6 April 2014|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140519214609/http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2010/10/101028-chupacabra-evolution-halloween-science-monsters-chupacabras-picture/|archive-date=19 May 2014}}</ref>

In 2010, [[University of Michigan]] biologist Barry O'Connor concluded that all the chupacabra reports in the United States were simply coyotes infected with the parasite ''[[Sarcoptes scabiei]]'', whose symptoms would explain most of the features of the chupacabra: they would be left with little fur, thickened skin, and a rank odor. O'Connor theorized that the attacks on goats occurred "because these animals are greatly weakened, [so] they're going to have a hard time hunting. So they may be forced into attacking livestock because it's easier than running down a rabbit or a deer."<ref>{{cite web|url=http://ur.umich.edu/1011/Oct25_10/1698-scary-chupacabras-monster|date=25 October 2010|title=Scary chupacabras monster is as much victim as villain|last=Ross-Flannigan|first=Nancy|website=The University Record|publisher=University of Michigan|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200827005255/http://ur.umich.edu/1011/Oct25_10/1698-scary-chupacabras-monster|archive-date=27 August 2020}}</ref><ref name=Radford2011/> Both dogs and coyotes can kill and not consume the prey, either because they are inexperienced, or due to injury or difficulty in killing the prey.<ref name=Radford2011/><ref name="Wade and Bowns">{{cite web|url=http://texnat.tamu.edu/about/procedures-for-evaluating/evaluation-of-suspected-predator-kills/|title=Evaluation of Suspected Predator Kills|date=May 2010|last1=Wade|first1=Dale A.|last2=Bowns|first2=James E.|website=Texas AgriLife Research and Extension Center|publisher=[[Texas A&M University]]|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120101055717/http://texnat.tamu.edu/about/procedures-for-evaluating/evaluation-of-suspected-predator-kills/|archive-date=1 January 2012}}</ref> The prey can survive the attack and die afterwards from [[internal bleeding]] or [[circulatory shock]].<ref name=Radford2011/><ref name="Wade and Bowns"/> The presence of two holes in the neck, corresponding with the [[canine teeth]], are to be expected since this is the only way that most land [[carnivore]]s have to catch their prey.<ref name=Radford2011/> There are reports of stray [[Xoloitzcuintle|Mexican hairless dogs]] being mistaken for chupacabras.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://edition.cnn.com/video/#/video/offbeat/2009/09/01/roldan.chupacabra.KSAT?iref=videosearch|title=Breaking News Videos, Story Video and Show Clips|date=12 March 2014|publisher=CNN|access-date=5 December 2014|archive-date=31 August 2010|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100831124519/http://edition.cnn.com/video/#/video/offbeat/2009/09/01/roldan.chupacabra.KSAT?iref=videosearch|url-status=dead}}</ref>