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

Let's Kill All the Mosquitoes

slate.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 441 posts

Re: Let's Kill All the Mosquitoes

#151

Post by ommunist »

sliverstorm wrote: post #57
lifeformed wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There will be side effects, but could it really be worse than the alternative? That is, one million deaths per year.

They aren't a random niche animal. Mosquitoes are pollinators and a major food source for many, many other animals. We know that "pollinator" and "major food source" can be critical roles in an ecosystem.

+1. But they are not the only ones. However, I 'd rather observe tropical ecosystems for 10 more years before making such a radical effort. Like I said earlier, no one is eradicating cars just because more than a million humans die in car accidents every year.

Re: Let's Kill All the Mosquitoes

#152

Post by JBReefer »

ch4s3 wrote: post #80
mikestew wrote: post #5

This is one of those ideas that sounds genius on its face, until it's actually implemented. Kudzu? Grows fast, prevents erosion, let's pay farmers to till it into the top soil. MTBE? Prevents engine knock, makes for cleaner air, let's mandate its use at the federal level. Whoopsie, once it's in the water we can't get it out, and its a carcinogen. Let's kill all of the mosquitos because we find their presence unpleasa…

Kudzu is great for erosion and its invasiveness in the Southeastern US is GREATLY exaggerated. Apparently the 1996 survey that is most cited greatly overestimated the number of hectares covered.

Stuff in the south in general grows really, really fast.

Re: Let's Kill All the Mosquitoes

#153

Post by x1798DE »

ommunist wrote: post #128
saulrh wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Something like 30 out of the 500 anopheles species are capable of carrying malaria. Of those, only those two matter, because the rest won't bite humans. Eradicating those two would be sufficient and another species (that doesn't bite humans) would take over. "Bites Humans" is furthermore not a strong enough competitive advantage to overcome any attempts to eradicate a successor that picks up the disease-ridden malari…

Look at this problem from different angle. These two species are only abundant in areas where humans live. The malaria annual death toll is about 440000 lives. Maybe it is more worth of an effort to move humans out of there? Since no one is going to eradicate cars worldwide just because the annual human death toll in car accidents is 1.25 million!

But the ongoing cost of eliminating cars would be enormous. The ancestor post is saying that there would be only fixed costs involved in eliminating malaria-transmitting species of mosquito.

Re: Let's Kill All the Mosquitoes

#155

Post by labster »

myohan wrote: post #137
maaku wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those eradications were paid for by the Department of Agriculture (and equivalent organizations in other regions). Who is going to pay for the mosquito? I'm not objecting. I think we should eradicate the mosquito. But as someone who has worked for the government (albeit a different branch) I know that bureaucrats are not being evil or heartless when they don't allocate funds for necessary work that falls outside of t…

"they could go to jail for misallocation of taxpayer funds" can you site a source where this has happened before...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/City_of_Bell_scandal came to mind in less than 5 seconds; I'm sure there are many others.

Re: Let's Kill All the Mosquitoes

#158

Post by ommunist »

brbsix wrote: post #88

I realize this is blasphemy to some, but perhaps it's time to consider further use of DDT.

This is indeed blasphemy. I worked close with people who replaced Soviet DDT programme for controlling gypsy moth populations with effective biological treatment programme in 70-ies (viral agents species-specific). Cheaper, easier to apply, no side effects, real cute. Took 15 years to develop.

Re: Let's Kill All the Mosquitoes

#159

Post by astazangasta »

Turing_Machine wrote: post #147
astazangasta wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Err, I can give you a credible reason to believe that it won't: the parasite will inevitably develop resistance. Here is the paper where they talk about the mechanism of resistance being conferred on the mosquito: http://www.pnas.org/content/109/28/E1922.abstract The mechanism is this: "These scFvs are derived from antibodies specific to a parasite chitinase, the 25 kDa protein and the circumsporozoite protein, respe…

First, you're confusing wiping out the mosquito species with giving the mosquitos resistance to the malaria parasite. Those are two different things. Second, there is no reason that a CRISPR-based system is limited to a single target. Will you also lay $1,000 against a system that targets ten species-unique sequences at once? You're basically talking about curing malaria in mosquitoes. Neither I nor the article is ta…

> First, you're confusing wiping out the mosquito species with giving the mosquitos resistance to the malaria parasite. Those are two different things.

You're the one who brought up CRISPR and gene drive. Perhaps you should read the actual paper: http://www.pnas.org/content/112/49/E6736.full; you'll see that the proposal is entirely about giving mosquitoes resistance to the malaria parasite, not about eradication. That is, the goal is to eliminate the parasite in mosquito populations (i.e., cure malaria in mosquitoes), not to kill mosquitoes.

>Second, there is no reason that a CRISPR-based system is limited to a single target. Will you also lay $1,000 against a system that targets ten species-unique sequences at once?

Yes. On-target mutations are trivial to produce, and alleles segregate independently.

Re: Let's Kill All the Mosquitoes

#160

Post by joekrill »

bryanlarsen wrote: post #69
joekrill wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They very well could be. That's just it -- we don't know. And when we kill them all off, are we going to be able to reverse it when we find out that the result is causing two million deaths per year?

The worst man-made ecological disasters in history caused tens of thousands of deaths. We can say with certainty that killing off a few species of mosquitoes will not be worse.

You're suggesting that because it's never happened before (that we know of), we can say with _certainty_ it won't happen in the future? Can we go back 100 years and say that about climate change please?
Post reply on HN