The starement is still nonsensical. The costs of mosquito and other insect vector-borne pathogens are enormous. From the World Health Organization report “A global brief on vector-borne disease”:
*These diseases also exacerbate poverty. Illness and disability prevent people from working and supporting themselves and their family, causing further hardship and impeding economic development. Dengue, for example, imposes a substantial economic burden on families and governments, both in medical costs and in working days lost due to illness. According to studies from eight countries, an average dengue episode represents 14.8 lost days for ambulatory patients at an average cost of US$ 514 and 18.9 days for non-fatal hospitalized patients at an average cost of US$ 1491 (3–7).
Vector-borne diseases therefore play a central role in poverty reduction and economic development. An econometric model for malaria suggests that countries with intensive malaria have income levels of only one third of those that do not have malaria (8).*
There is no scenario in which elimination of these diseases is not a net economic positive as well as relieving stress on overburdened basic medical and care services, quite aside from the humanitarian concerns.
Andrea = Andrew, i.e. “man”, virile/vital energy. We can take back the “power, force” meaning for girls but such names are traditionally masculine and you should still bet on a randomly-chosen Andrea being male.
I really hope you are kidding, because the way people would “adapt” to not losing a million people a year to mosquito-borne diseases is by awarding the person who made it possible a fucking Nobel prize in medicine.
You aren’t listening, or at least not thinking about it… of course they’d give the scientists Nobel prizes.
What I’m saying is that some of the places where malaria and mosquito borne diseases are endemic are already kind of hanging on by a shoestring in terms of food security and similar metrics.
Saving a million lives a year could potentially cause population growth that would overstress those places and cause famines, wars, etc…
So there would need to be help for those places in order to prepare for that stuff, whether it’s birth control or economic assistance, or whatever. THAT is what I have been trying to get at, not that it’s something we should not consider doing.
Just eliminating mosquito borne diseases and thereby increasing the population and leaving those countries to deal with it seems kind of… half-assed?
If someone was trying to kill your kids would you say “I can’t stop him because what if somebody worse comes along later?”
This is literally life or death. Mosquitoes kill millions of people. It’s not like we’re eliminating crickets because they disturb our slumber on camping trips.
And yes, every species that kills millions of people should be eliminated, from microbes to insects to saber tooth tigers.
I may has missed it above, but, as pointed out, mosquitos can be a food source, so are researchers working on a gene drive for the parasite the mosquitos carry?
I absolutely agree. Though I suppose I have seen it applied to white people over here on a few occasions (but only extreme ones like eternal youth/no death from old age, not for heart disease or cancer).
Also strange what conditions it gets applied in - get more access to cleaner water “over there” and prevent all those deaths and it doesn’t usually get the same kinds of comments.
Also very glad someone pointed this out, as I was thinking the same thing.
I have no insight except to say that CRISPR is frighteningly easy. I had a gene I’d been trying to get solid expression knockdown for years, and largely failing. My first ever attempt at CRISPR, with absolutely no experiments to optimize anything, knocked the gene completely out. It was like goddamn magic.
The evolutionary development of the CRISPR capability by prokaryotes to recognize and defend against bacteriophages is also like magic, and its discovery (multiple times by serendipity) illustrated far greater sophistication and active adaptability (beyond combinatorial inheritance) than previously suspected. There are some who even consider it a violation of the central dogma of molecular biology although that isn’t strictly true; it is better considered a type of natural genetic engineering in which the Cas9 and other CRISPR-associated proteins splice in signature sequences of threatening viruses to allow bacteria to protect themselves. It does have a lot of implications for the role of gene transfer in evolution, though.
Although recent work by some of my collaborators has shown that Aedes head peptide might have different effects to what we previously thought. Still, it’s an interesting idea. I’m thinking of ways to play around with it.
I’m still of the same thinking I was in post #3. Yes, the risk of unintended consequences is a good reason to proceed cautiously, but mosquitoes (and the diseases they carry) are such prolific killers that it’s hard for me to see an argument for not proceeding at all.
I know there have been a lot of responses to this already, but let me add one more: If the population growth were projected to be 1 million people per year more than current projections, would you think a program to kill a million people more-or-less at random was a good solution? Because that’s basically what we get with mosquitoes.
I’m reminded of the argument, “We can’t have universal healthcare, what if there are long wait times?” Which always made me want to say, “So, you think a good solution to long wait times is to make it so a bunch of people just can’t afford to go to the doctor?”
See the link I included in post #3. The next logical choice is humans, followed by snakes.
(Yes, I realize snakes, and mosquitoes for that matter, aren’t a single species…)
It should also be pointed out that there are many species of mosquitoes, only a few of which are the disease carriers. If they were wiped out, one of the other species would just expand to fill their biological niche, and any predators that rely on them probably aren’t going to care about the exact taxonomy of their dinner.
While they do need to proceed with extreme caution, this particular application has the potential to eliminate a huge amount of human suffering with little or no downside.
That said, like any other powerful technology, gene drive in the wrong hands could also cause huge problems.
Imagine someone attacking a country by modifying a native insect to carry malaria or something worse, or waging economic warfare by eliminating an important pollinator.
