7 ms·

Another example case that could be solved by exterminating mosquitoes. We have the ability, and as best we know there would be little to no side effects. Humans

Another example case that could be solved by exterminating mosquitoes. We have the ability, and as best we know there would be little to no side effects. Humans are already drastically altering evolution and survival of the fittest, we might as well be smart about it.

Someone1234 11y ago
Cost is the largest reason. While you're right in saying that we can exterminate mosquitoes, the question remains how costly that would be. For example if we used the infertile male mosquito method, we'd need to bread billions of them and release them very carefully for maximum effect. That's do-able but a massive undertaking. Plus we could spend tens to hundreds of millions of dollars on this (perhaps more) and have them spring back up a few years later just from a single missed colony (keep in mind they can breed in almost ALL still water, from a puddle, to a lake, to a water holding tank). In the Americas you'd have to wipe them out in massive areas of jungle, every island, every country (even ones with bad relations), it is just mind boggling once you start thinking about it. It is totally possible but would be the single largest human undertaking in our history. PS - Indefinite population control might be more viable than literal extinction. Then you just release infertile males every season in the hopes of dropping their numbers in half or better.
- ethbro 11y ago
  With the possibility of being able to insert inherited traits via recent genetic advances, I believe more modern methods are looking at genetic combinations that are repressed in the parent, but lethal to any offspring (or cause infertility in offspring). [1] [1] http://www.bbc.com/news/health-35024794 http://www.bbc.com/news/health-35024794
- crusso 11y ago
  No, cost is not a reason. The infertile male mosquito method isn't the best one we have. Geneticists have discovered ways to drive terminal genes into entire populations. A mosquito species could be wiped out in no time with a gene drive. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gene_drive https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gene_drive
alpeb 11y ago
I was gonna say that'd be devastating down the food chain, but then I found this claiming otherwise: "A world without mosquitoes" http://www.nature.com/news/2010/100721/full/466432a.html http://www.nature.com/news/2010/100721/full/466432a.html
- reitanqild 11y ago
  Yes yes yes, the reason why I really like HN: many (most?) people here, like parent, think and even research before they post. Thanks alpeb!
- vannevar 11y ago
  FTA: "...it's difficult to see what the downside would be to removal, except for collateral damage" The article goes on to quote biologists who think the consequences could be severe for some species (e.g., some birds). Given their destructiveness, we may want to eradicate mosquitos, but let's not pretend that such an undertaking would not only be costly, but carry a virtually unknowable level of risk.
speeder 11y ago
I am from Brazil, we are actively trying to exterminate mosquitoes, it ins't working... First, ignorant people don't cooperate, and seemly trying to make them non-ignorant (ie: teach them), don't work, some people just refuse to learn even when you shove information in their head. Then any slight mishap that break the systematic killing of mosquitos, allow them to come back in full force, for example in São Paulo a contract problem led the government mosquito killers to be carless for some months, meaning they could not get fast around to kill nests, in this year the mosquito population exploded, undoing several years of work.
- sandworm101 11y ago
  >>> meaning they could not get fast around to kill nests They have nests? I was born in northern canada, mosquito capital of the planet, and that's news to me.
  - Fomite 11y ago
    They don't have "nests" but there are prime breeding sites, like the inside of old tires, that are essentially "Mosquito Population Boom Ground Zero".
- rmellow 11y ago
  Clarifying speeder's comment on "ignorant people": Mosquito larvae grow on still water, such as rain water accumulated in old tires, vases and debris.
zepto 11y ago
Disease carrying mosquitos are a major force holding back logging operations in rainforest regions. If this barrier were removed without a suitable alternative means of regulation, the consequences could be catastrophic. I agree with you that we should be smart about how we alter evolution.
- krschultz 11y ago
  Not sure I agree with protecting the trees over preventing brain damage in babies, but that's just me.
  - zepto 11y ago
    If you kill all the trees, we'll have worse problems than the current harm from mosquitos. Humans depend on the biosphere for survival. I agree that protecting babies from brain damage is very important, but certainly not at any cost.
    - BinaryIdiot 11y ago
      > If you kill all the trees An undertaking so MASSIVE to "kill all the trees" is absolutely hyperbolic nonsense. The parent never suggested that. At worst, if your claims above are true, more logging may occur. This is a far, far, far, far cry from killing all the trees (even when limiting the context to the rainforest). When you're arguing with someone don't derive meaning from someone's rebuttal that doesn't exist in order to help your position; it makes it appear that you only want to deal with extremes without evidence which paints your views in a nonrealistic way.
      - zepto 11y ago
        Why not say the same to the parent, or yourself then? The rebuttal was all about sacrificing trees to prevent brain damage to babies which is a false dichotomy. Seems like you don't have a problem with 'extremes' of meaning that don't exist when they support your position.
ianbicking 11y ago
I think it would even be a net ecological boon if we could actually exterminate mosquitoes – tremendous effort goes into suppressing mosquitoes, all of it with significant collateral damage to the environment. But I don't think we actually have the ability, do we? We have some promising approaches, though it's unclear to me how good any of those approaches are at getting down to zero mosquitoes. I suppose we'd need better detection as well so that we could incrementally eradicate the mosquitoes and then quickly address any resurgences.
pfarnsworth 11y ago
When will humans learn that you can't just remove one thing and have it not replaced by another. There are tons of unintended consequences by doing things like this. Sure, mosquitoes might be gone, but what will replace it? We don't know, and each region might have different replacement insects. I don't think you can get rid of that amount of biomass without it being replaced by something else.
- hueving 11y ago
  That's only the case when they are competing with something or are eating something. Mosquitoes do neither so their existence does not suppress other insects.
- adolfojp 11y ago
  Whatever replaces mosquitos can't be worse than a generation of cripples, which is the biggest threat from zika. As a guy who lives in an area that's affected by dengue, chikungunya, and now also zika I say kill them all. We'll rather take our chances with hypothetical future dangers than with very real current ones.
  - technofiend 11y ago
    There are plenty of species of mosquito that don't transmit these respective diseases. Sure, the diseases themselves may eventually mutate so they are transmissible by something else, but in the meantime wiping out A. Egyptii (for instance) is fine as long as other species are still there for bats, spiders, etc.
ph0rque 11y ago
Why not modify them genetically to prefer fruit and plant nectar instead of blood? Mosquitoes already feed on nectar: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mosquito#Feeding_by_adults https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mosquito#Feeding_by_adults
- Terr_ 11y ago
  On a practical level, why would we bother? Anything that'd transform a whole population that deeply is going to be much much harder than just poisoning them, and the resulting mutant-mosquitoes aren't filling any new or useful niche. (They'll probably die anyway from competition with better-adapted species.) Even the moral dimension seems... lacking: I doubt you'll will ever soulfully stare deep into the eyes of a mosquito and confess your species-guilt for having destroyed them, let alone explain why your cruel warping of their species was deemed the better choice.
  - ph0rque 11y ago
    Scientists already modify mosquitoes to produce only male offspring: http://www.iflscience.com/health-and-medicine/gm-mosquitos-could-eradicate-wild-populations-only-producing-male-offspring http://www.iflscience.com/health-and-medicine/gm-mosquitos-c... I don't have any evidence, but I don't think that will work: life will find a way. But a modification that will let mosquitoes survive, but not bother humans (or animals), might be a good compromise.
- ufo 11y ago
  The whole point of mosquitos drinking blood is because its more protein rich and helps them lay more eggs.
Fomite 11y ago
We've tried exterminating mosquitos before. It turns out they're very hardy, and it's an extremely expensive program that needs absolute, global buy-in.
sandworm101 11y ago
In brazil, mosquitoes may be nothing more than a pest to be eliminated. But in places like Canada and Russia (ie the north) they are a huge part of the food chain. They are so numerous that swarms could be classified as carnivorous. They eat a weight of animal protein equivalent to that consumed by a large carnivore. Actually eliminating mosquitoes as a species would be like eliminating plankton. The ripple effects locally and across the planet may be incalculable.
Arubis 11y ago
Having a major mosquito-borne epidemic that touches a _rich_ country would be the most straightforward way to effect this decision. Malaria was once endemic to the US, and while we didn't at the time have the capability to totally eradicate mosquitoes, that didn't stop the CDC from wiping it out: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Malaria_Eradication_Program https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Malaria_Eradication_P... It'd be wonderful to see mosquitoes utterly eliminated. They're the source of massive human suffering worldwide.
pvaldes 11y ago
> as best we know there would be little to no side effects I think that to expect just the opposite, a rearrange of all the food chain and lots of collateral effects, would be more realistic. A world suddenly without many species of fishes, birds, amphibians, spiders or predatory flies do not looks like a stable system.

Someone1234 11y ago

Cost is the largest reason. While you're right in saying that we can exterminate mosquitoes, the question remains how costly that would be. For example if we used the infertile male mosquito method, we'd need to bread billions of them and release them very carefully for maximum effect. That's do-able but a massive undertaking. Plus we could spend tens to hundreds of millions of dollars on this (perhaps more) and have them spring back up a few years later just from a single missed colony (keep in mind they can breed in almost ALL still water, from a puddle, to a lake, to a water holding tank). In the Americas you'd have to wipe them out in massive areas of jungle, every island, every country (even ones with bad relations), it is just mind boggling once you start thinking about it. It is totally possible but would be the single largest human undertaking in our history. PS - Indefinite population control might be more viable than literal extinction. Then you just release infertile males every season in the hopes of dropping their numbers in half or better.

ethbro 11y ago
With the possibility of being able to insert inherited traits via recent genetic advances, I believe more modern methods are looking at genetic combinations that are repressed in the parent, but lethal to any offspring (or cause infertility in offspring). [1] [1] http://www.bbc.com/news/health-35024794 http://www.bbc.com/news/health-35024794
crusso 11y ago
No, cost is not a reason. The infertile male mosquito method isn't the best one we have. Geneticists have discovered ways to drive terminal genes into entire populations. A mosquito species could be wiped out in no time with a gene drive. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gene_drive https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gene_drive

alpeb 11y ago

I was gonna say that'd be devastating down the food chain, but then I found this claiming otherwise: "A world without mosquitoes" http://www.nature.com/news/2010/100721/full/466432a.html http://www.nature.com/news/2010/100721/full/466432a.html

reitanqild 11y ago
Yes yes yes, the reason why I really like HN: many (most?) people here, like parent, think and even research before they post. Thanks alpeb!
vannevar 11y ago
FTA: "...it's difficult to see what the downside would be to removal, except for collateral damage" The article goes on to quote biologists who think the consequences could be severe for some species (e.g., some birds). Given their destructiveness, we may want to eradicate mosquitos, but let's not pretend that such an undertaking would not only be costly, but carry a virtually unknowable level of risk.

speeder 11y ago

I am from Brazil, we are actively trying to exterminate mosquitoes, it ins't working... First, ignorant people don't cooperate, and seemly trying to make them non-ignorant (ie: teach them), don't work, some people just refuse to learn even when you shove information in their head. Then any slight mishap that break the systematic killing of mosquitos, allow them to come back in full force, for example in São Paulo a contract problem led the government mosquito killers to be carless for some months, meaning they could not get fast around to kill nests, in this year the mosquito population exploded, undoing several years of work.

sandworm101 11y ago
>>> meaning they could not get fast around to kill nests They have nests? I was born in northern canada, mosquito capital of the planet, and that's news to me.
- Fomite 11y ago
  They don't have "nests" but there are prime breeding sites, like the inside of old tires, that are essentially "Mosquito Population Boom Ground Zero".
rmellow 11y ago
Clarifying speeder's comment on "ignorant people": Mosquito larvae grow on still water, such as rain water accumulated in old tires, vases and debris.

zepto 11y ago

Disease carrying mosquitos are a major force holding back logging operations in rainforest regions. If this barrier were removed without a suitable alternative means of regulation, the consequences could be catastrophic. I agree with you that we should be smart about how we alter evolution.

krschultz 11y ago
Not sure I agree with protecting the trees over preventing brain damage in babies, but that's just me.
- zepto 11y ago
  If you kill all the trees, we'll have worse problems than the current harm from mosquitos. Humans depend on the biosphere for survival. I agree that protecting babies from brain damage is very important, but certainly not at any cost.
  - BinaryIdiot 11y ago
    > If you kill all the trees An undertaking so MASSIVE to "kill all the trees" is absolutely hyperbolic nonsense. The parent never suggested that. At worst, if your claims above are true, more logging may occur. This is a far, far, far, far cry from killing all the trees (even when limiting the context to the rainforest). When you're arguing with someone don't derive meaning from someone's rebuttal that doesn't exist in order to help your position; it makes it appear that you only want to deal with extremes without evidence which paints your views in a nonrealistic way.
    - zepto 11y ago
      Why not say the same to the parent, or yourself then? The rebuttal was all about sacrificing trees to prevent brain damage to babies which is a false dichotomy. Seems like you don't have a problem with 'extremes' of meaning that don't exist when they support your position.

ianbicking 11y ago

I think it would even be a net ecological boon if we could actually exterminate mosquitoes – tremendous effort goes into suppressing mosquitoes, all of it with significant collateral damage to the environment. But I don't think we actually have the ability, do we? We have some promising approaches, though it's unclear to me how good any of those approaches are at getting down to zero mosquitoes. I suppose we'd need better detection as well so that we could incrementally eradicate the mosquitoes and then quickly address any resurgences.

pfarnsworth 11y ago

When will humans learn that you can't just remove one thing and have it not replaced by another. There are tons of unintended consequences by doing things like this. Sure, mosquitoes might be gone, but what will replace it? We don't know, and each region might have different replacement insects. I don't think you can get rid of that amount of biomass without it being replaced by something else.

hueving 11y ago
That's only the case when they are competing with something or are eating something. Mosquitoes do neither so their existence does not suppress other insects.
adolfojp 11y ago
Whatever replaces mosquitos can't be worse than a generation of cripples, which is the biggest threat from zika. As a guy who lives in an area that's affected by dengue, chikungunya, and now also zika I say kill them all. We'll rather take our chances with hypothetical future dangers than with very real current ones.
- technofiend 11y ago
  There are plenty of species of mosquito that don't transmit these respective diseases. Sure, the diseases themselves may eventually mutate so they are transmissible by something else, but in the meantime wiping out A. Egyptii (for instance) is fine as long as other species are still there for bats, spiders, etc.

ph0rque 11y ago

Why not modify them genetically to prefer fruit and plant nectar instead of blood? Mosquitoes already feed on nectar: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mosquito#Feeding_by_adults https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mosquito#Feeding_by_adults

Terr_ 11y ago
On a practical level, why would we bother? Anything that'd transform a whole population that deeply is going to be much much harder than just poisoning them, and the resulting mutant-mosquitoes aren't filling any new or useful niche. (They'll probably die anyway from competition with better-adapted species.) Even the moral dimension seems... lacking: I doubt you'll will ever soulfully stare deep into the eyes of a mosquito and confess your species-guilt for having destroyed them, let alone explain why your cruel warping of their species was deemed the better choice.
- ph0rque 11y ago
  Scientists already modify mosquitoes to produce only male offspring: http://www.iflscience.com/health-and-medicine/gm-mosquitos-could-eradicate-wild-populations-only-producing-male-offspring http://www.iflscience.com/health-and-medicine/gm-mosquitos-c... I don't have any evidence, but I don't think that will work: life will find a way. But a modification that will let mosquitoes survive, but not bother humans (or animals), might be a good compromise.
ufo 11y ago
The whole point of mosquitos drinking blood is because its more protein rich and helps them lay more eggs.

Fomite 11y ago

We've tried exterminating mosquitos before. It turns out they're very hardy, and it's an extremely expensive program that needs absolute, global buy-in.

sandworm101 11y ago

In brazil, mosquitoes may be nothing more than a pest to be eliminated. But in places like Canada and Russia (ie the north) they are a huge part of the food chain. They are so numerous that swarms could be classified as carnivorous. They eat a weight of animal protein equivalent to that consumed by a large carnivore. Actually eliminating mosquitoes as a species would be like eliminating plankton. The ripple effects locally and across the planet may be incalculable.

Arubis 11y ago

Having a major mosquito-borne epidemic that touches a _rich_ country would be the most straightforward way to effect this decision. Malaria was once endemic to the US, and while we didn't at the time have the capability to totally eradicate mosquitoes, that didn't stop the CDC from wiping it out: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Malaria_Eradication_Program https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Malaria_Eradication_P... It'd be wonderful to see mosquitoes utterly eliminated. They're the source of massive human suffering worldwide.

pvaldes 11y ago

> as best we know there would be little to no side effects I think that to expect just the opposite, a rearrange of all the food chain and lots of collateral effects, would be more realistic. A world suddenly without many species of fishes, birds, amphibians, spiders or predatory flies do not looks like a stable system.