Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Malaria breakthrough as scientists find ‘highly effective’ way to kill parasite

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 118 posts

Re: Malaria breakthrough as scientists find ‘highly effective’ way to kill parasite

#101

Post by ses1984 »

BurningFrog wrote: post #65
ses1984 wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When we drove species to extinction before, it was accidental, and it's usually viewed as a huge mistake. I wouldn't want to be one of the people who advocates for it, and then it turns out to be a giant disaster. The potential risk seems huge and could affect generations. Although I it would be pretty easy to hedge against that risk by keeping some mosquitos/eggs alive in a lab, and if the experiment goes wrong, re-…

> and then it turns out to be a giant disaster The purpose of this is to stop the current giant disaster of 1000+ people a day dying from malaria. I can't help thinking that if this was affecting American middle class neighborhoods where environmentalists live, the mosquitos would be wiped out quicker than plastic straws.

I'm not suggesting that we don't address the giant disaster of millions dying from malaria. There is another solution right now: mass produce malaria drugs. How far down would that drive the death toll I wonder.

Re: Malaria breakthrough as scientists find ‘highly effective’ way to kill parasite

#102

Post by blisterpeanuts »

peteretep wrote: post #74

Disappointing that this might halt approaches that involve KILLING ALL THE MOSQUITOS

When dosed with ivermectin, people's blood becomes deadly to mosquitoes. I guess it's better than nothing. But like you, I want that entire species gone.

Bite me and you die.

Re: Malaria breakthrough as scientists find ‘highly effective’ way to kill parasite

#103

Post by saiya-jin »

hubert1234 wrote: post #81
BurningFrog wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> and then it turns out to be a giant disaster The purpose of this is to stop the current giant disaster of 1000+ people a day dying from malaria. I can't help thinking that if this was affecting American middle class neighborhoods where environmentalists live, the mosquitos would be wiped out quicker than plastic straws.

Dont be so sure, I personally believe that alligators and crocodiles should be wiped out but the majority believes that the risk of being eaten alive during a swim in a pond nextdoor is an acceptable risk and the natural right of nature over humans. People have a weird disposition to protect nature beyond what is due. We effectively wiped out wolves from Europe and I personally couldnt be happier that I dont have to…

Wolves wouldn't attack you, I guess you read one too many children's stories. The only possibility would be desperate, starving big pack of wolves and a lone traveler in the middle of nowhere. I've experienced it a bit, alone in winter mountains ski touring and camping, but even then they just carefully observe from distance and then move on.

As for bears, we have them back home in eastern europe, in fact vastly overpopulated given the area available and their territoriality. Practically no attacks on cyclists, hikers etc (yes like 1 every year or two something minor, more people die from ticks and tripping over stones and roots). If you make any noise while in the forest, they will notice you from far and avoid you.

That said, we don't have grizzly or polar bears, those are a bit different and majestic beasts.

As for general discussion, your point doesn't make much sense. We could wipe out just types of mosquitoes responsible for super-deadly diseases like malaria and dengue (and few others) and keep the annoying but otherwise harmless suckers still around. In my subjective opinion we wouldn't even notice the transition (at least not in the bad sense).

Re: Malaria breakthrough as scientists find ‘highly effective’ way to kill parasite

#104

Post by caraffle »

mmsimanga wrote: post #82
eps wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unless you had newborn jaundice, which is unrelated to hepatitis and quite common.

I was probably between 5 and 7 years old. I remember because my village gang were fascinated with how yellow my urine was. It is the one time I can say I won the pissing contest :-).

Any chance you were screened for anemias? Carriers for sickle, thalassemia,and G6PD deficiency all have malaria protective effects and ties in nicely with yellow urine and jaundice. Hemolysis increases urobilin in urine leading to a more yellow color.

These are pretty common in african populations so I wouldn't be too surprised.

Re: Malaria breakthrough as scientists find ‘highly effective’ way to kill parasite

#105

Post by blisterpeanuts »

sszz wrote: post #19
RcouF1uZ4gsC wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Then there are others who are in general opposed to this sort of interference in an animal population on ethical grounds. There are over 250,000 children under the age of 5 that die every year from malaria. In my ethical system, there is very little that can possibly justify trying to prevent something that will save the lives of 250,000 children a year. Anyone who actively tries to delay wiping out malaria causing…

There are legitimate concerns about efficacy (there’s research that suggests that evolution will help mosquitoes escape the gene drive effect, making it useful for only a short period of time) and about unknown ecological consequences (knocking out a primary food source in an ecosystem can have devastating health and economic consequences). That’s not to say it’s not worth it, but it is worth debating and figuring ou…

Do you have any links to the research about evolving to resist the gene drive effect?

There are bio-ethicists arguing that it's wrong to eradicate an entire species. There are also biologists expressing concern about damaging the food chain.

Regarding the former concern, it's only a tiny segment of our world that actually cares whether mosquitoes exist or not as part of some abstract idealism or wishing to preserve biodiversity. Most of us would be beyond happy to see this miserable creature eradicated.

Regarding the food chain, there are some 5,000 species of mosquitoes, of which only about 100 feed on mammalian blood. Out of those 100, nine species carry disease such as malaria and zika. If we only targeted those 9, we'd have a huge win while scarcely affecting the pollination and prey species role of the rest of the family of mosquitoes.

If we targeted the 100, we'd greatly increase the quality of life for not only 7 billion humans but also for tens of millions of mammals made miserable by blood sucking swarms. The great herds of reindeer of northern Canada, for example, deliberately run in single file, to reduce exposure to mosquitoes that swarm around them in the spring. Mosquitoes are a serious parasite up there; one herd animal can lose a pint or more of blood in a single day.

Re: Malaria breakthrough as scientists find ‘highly effective’ way to kill parasite

#106

Post by blisterpeanuts »

stubish wrote: post #91
ChefboyOG wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This kind of experiment is called a gene drive, and there's a huge debate in scientific communities right now around whether it's responsible or not to use them, particularly around the mosquito problem. A professor of mine who works in the field was discussing this with us last week. The idea with mosquitoes specifically is that we can wipe out specifically the mosquito populations that carry most diseases. The deba…

A problem is the discussion almost immediately derails into the eradication of all mosquitos, such as almost immediately happened right here. My understanding of these experiments is it is the eradication of particular subspecies of mosquitos, the ones able to transmit malaria, dengue fever, zika etc. And the difference is huge; wipe out a dozen subspecies and their ecological niches will be filled by other subspecie…

Correct, there are thousands of species of mosquito that do not feed on human blood. The question is whether a genetic weapon could be made specific enough to target only the blood suckers while sparing the pollinators.

Re: Malaria breakthrough as scientists find ‘highly effective’ way to kill parasite

#107

Post by mmsimanga »

caraffle wrote: post #104
mmsimanga wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was probably between 5 and 7 years old. I remember because my village gang were fascinated with how yellow my urine was. It is the one time I can say I won the pissing contest :-).

Any chance you were screened for anemias? Carriers for sickle, thalassemia,and G6PD deficiency all have malaria protective effects and ties in nicely with yellow urine and jaundice. Hemolysis increases urobilin in urine leading to a more yellow color. These are pretty common in african populations so I wouldn't be too surprised.

I don't recall ever being screened for any of the anemias. One of my late cousins was anemic. It was the cause of his death (couldn't get an ambulance and blood transfusion in time). If it is genetic perhaps there is a chance I am a carrier??? Anyway the yellow urine didn't last too long if my memory serves me well (week or two at most) and I have been relatively healthy since then (touch wood). As I result of having had yellow jaundice I was told I could never donate blood.

Re: Malaria breakthrough as scientists find ‘highly effective’ way to kill parasite

#108

Post by caraffle »

mmsimanga wrote: post #107
caraffle wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Any chance you were screened for anemias? Carriers for sickle, thalassemia,and G6PD deficiency all have malaria protective effects and ties in nicely with yellow urine and jaundice. Hemolysis increases urobilin in urine leading to a more yellow color. These are pretty common in african populations so I wouldn't be too surprised.

I don't recall ever being screened for any of the anemias. One of my late cousins was anemic. It was the cause of his death (couldn't get an ambulance and blood transfusion in time). If it is genetic perhaps there is a chance I am a carrier??? Anyway the yellow urine didn't last too long if my memory serves me well (week or two at most) and I have been relatively healthy since then (touch wood). As I result of having…

Probably an anemia then! Carriers still have protective effects without too much of the bad, there may have been some precipitating event during your episode.

Re: Malaria breakthrough as scientists find ‘highly effective’ way to kill parasite

#109

Post by projektfu »

jessaustin wrote: post #67
gus_massa wrote: post #6

From the press article: > Child malaria episodes could be reduced by up to 20% if populations living in high-risk areas are given Ivermectin, [....] > An expert, independent from the study, said reports of resistance to the current class of malaria drugs are on the rise. [...] “There are cases of the drugs being sold over the counter, leading to their resistance and overuse. [...]” If the plan is to give everyone the…

We give it to our horses every year, and it still kills intestinal worms. Some genetic changes are just so large that they are extremely unlikely.

There is quite a lot of acquired resistance to ivermectin in horse strongyles. Just not in S. vulgaris that was causing infarction. Now, the recommendations for horses are changing to a quantitatively driven approach based on fecal egg count rather than routine annual deworming. Pasture rotation is also useful.

In sheep, the barber-pole worm Haemonchus has become resistant to most approved parasiticides. Resistance is a definite problem.

Re: Malaria breakthrough as scientists find ‘highly effective’ way to kill parasite

#110

Post by nunb »

hubert1234 wrote: post #81
BurningFrog wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> and then it turns out to be a giant disaster The purpose of this is to stop the current giant disaster of 1000+ people a day dying from malaria. I can't help thinking that if this was affecting American middle class neighborhoods where environmentalists live, the mosquitos would be wiped out quicker than plastic straws.

Dont be so sure, I personally believe that alligators and crocodiles should be wiped out but the majority believes that the risk of being eaten alive during a swim in a pond nextdoor is an acceptable risk and the natural right of nature over humans. People have a weird disposition to protect nature beyond what is due. We effectively wiped out wolves from Europe and I personally couldnt be happier that I dont have to…

Still a threat in some parts of Europe... Including urban centers like Moscow.
Post reply on HN