Oh good, screwworms are back (2025)

Post by sanktanglia » Thu, Jun 11, 2026, 5:29 PM UTC

timr wrote: post #15

maeglin wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure what your point is here. Yes, the screwworm problem predates the funding cut. Surely that should prompt an increase or at least a maintenance of existing funding for monitoring programs though, certainly not a decrease. I think atoav is saying the /stupid consequence/ is the cut in funding itself, not the screwworm resurgence.

> I'm not sure what your point is here. My point is that the instinct to be partisan on this issue is inane, but also factually incorrect. > Yes, the screwworm problem predates the funding cut. Great, so we're agreed that this is at least a bi-partisan problem. > Surely that should prompt an increase or at least a maintenance of existing funding for monitoring programs though, certainly not a decrease. Fortunately, i…

Post by jmward01 » Thu, Jun 11, 2026, 5:32 PM UTC

Post by zdragnar » Thu, Jun 11, 2026, 5:35 PM UTC

inigyou wrote: post #18

Havoc wrote: post #4

Chances of current US gov mounting a coordinated scientific campaign to get on top of this seem vanishingly small to me. They’re busy defunding and dismantling any gov operation that smells like science

I heard there was one keeping this under control. It involved transgenic flies, which sounds close to transgender. DOGE ended it. It was also pitched as "why are we studying the mating habits of flies?"

Post by jmward01 » Thu, Jun 11, 2026, 5:44 PM UTC

readthenotes1 wrote: post #27

jmward01 wrote: post #24

Trust in science is so low in the US that this was bound to happen. The author's conclusion nails it: But institutional failures like this aren’t just the aggregate failure of a number of irresponsible people, they are a failure of a cultural attitude that doesn’t demand excellence from everyone in order to get the job done. I'll add though that when crisis happens the entity 'doing something about it' suddenly looks…

Is this like fouci funding gain of function research and then being in charge of managing results (including but not limited to suppressing information about his role in it)?

Post by inigyou » Thu, Jun 11, 2026, 5:46 PM UTC

zdragnar wrote: post #26

inigyou wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I heard there was one keeping this under control. It involved transgenic flies, which sounds close to transgender. DOGE ended it. It was also pitched as "why are we studying the mating habits of flies?"

We already have medicines that treat the problem. We've had it solved for a long time. We didn't need to genetically modify flies to solve it then, and we don't now. See sibling threads.