7 ms·

The World Is Closer Than Ever to Eradicating Guinea Worm

118 points by dpflan 10y ago

enraged_camel 10y ago
Going back to the conversations we've had in the Zika thread[1], why are we OK with eliminating the Guinea Worm, but not certain species of mosquitoes? [1]https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12322885 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12322885 A lot of people in that thread made the argument that we shouldn't exterminate a species without first fully understanding the consequences. Yet we seem to be doing that here with this parasite, and no one seems to be saying, "but... think of the ecosystem!"
- Roritharr 10y ago
  As a contrarian in these topics, without being able to prove it, i assume that nothing terribly Bad can come from exterminating a species, even if it were bees, and their connections to the ecosystem are well understood. Nature is a rough place as niches tend to fill up extremely fast. So if we were to exterminate mosquitos, my gut says we'd survive it. But luckily my gut doesnt make Policy.
  - ufo 10y ago
    Nature rebalances extremely fast but its does so by catastrophically changing into a different state instead of having old niches be refilled. One of the famous examples is how experimentally removing starfish (a sea urchin predator) from a kelp forest resulted in an explosion of the sea urchin population and a transformation of the kelp forest into a "sea urchin desert". There was a nice article linked in HN about this recently: http://nautil.us/issue/37/currents/the-ecologist-who-threw-starfish-rp http://nautil.us/issue/37/currents/the-ecologist-who-threw-s... https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11824375 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11824375
- dpflan 10y ago
  I agree with the idea of the unknown consequences of eliminating pieces of ecosystems. We've seen the impact of the removal of apex predators like wolves, and movements like rewilding champion the idea of reintroduction, rebalancing of the ecosystem through brining such animals back. So we seem to think that maintaining ecosystems is important now. Complexity theory and modeling could be very useful to "estimating" the impact of eradication, I'm not sure how the impact is being evaluated though. (In the future can man-made animals step in and play vital positions in ecosystems, like biological shims when we realize the importance or primary role a species played within that ecosystem?) Rewilding References: 1. Reintroducing Wolves in Scotland: http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-33017511 http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-33017511 2. Wiki: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rewilding_(conservation_biology) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rewilding_(conservation_biolog... 3. Rewilding Institute: http://rewilding.org/rewildit/ http://rewilding.org/rewildit/
  - ufo 10y ago
    The obvious ecological impact of erradicating the guinea worm is decreased pressure on the population of Humans. However, most people would agree that it is not ethical to intentionally allow diseases to roam free as a way to control the size of human populations...
- rch 10y ago
  With mosquitos the discussion does tend to meander around what I see as the core issue: the wisdom of developing and field testing a technology capable of eradicating a target species. http://www.nature.com/nbt/journal/v34/n1/full/nbt.3439.html http://www.nature.com/nbt/journal/v34/n1/full/nbt.3439.html
- maxerickson 10y ago
  One factor is that there is a lot less "we" involved with the Guinea Worm. I mean, good luck suppressing the knowledge that filtering your drinking water through a cloth prevents a devastating episode where a 3 foot worm crawls out of your body. The proposed programs for eradicating mosquitoes involve things like releasing millions of dollars of genetically modified mosquitoes and putting larvicides and insecticides in all known bodies of standing water.
  - chr1 10y ago
    Using gene drive doesn't require releasing huge number of modified mosquitos, and doesn't require larvicides.
- Natsu 10y ago
  The fact that we've unintentionally wiped out so many species lends credence to the idea that, on average, very few individual specie are all that important. Of course, just leave it to us to find the exception someday...
  - TillE 10y ago
    And introduced destructive species like kudzu and the grey squirrel. These have results which are certainly bad, but far far away from causing any kind of catastrophic ecological collapse.
    - hackbinary 10y ago
      The demise of the Red Squirrel (in the UK) maybe more due the the loss of habitat than than because of the Grey Squirrel. The Grey Squirrel may just be a convenient scapegoat. http://www.forestry.gov.uk/fr/infd-8c8bhc http://www.forestry.gov.uk/fr/infd-8c8bhc
- HippoViolation 10y ago
  ok captain picard
  - sctb 10y ago
    Please don't comment like this here. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- bertil 10y ago
  Mosquitoes are an essential part of the diet of many species: birds, spiders, toads, small rodents. The assumption is that those species could find replacements, but it is still a major change. The Guinea worm presumably does not represent a significant ecological step.
  - enraged_camel 10y ago
    >>Mosquitoes are an essential part of the diet of many species: birds, spiders, toads, small rodents. The assumption is that those species could find replacements, but it is still a major change. According to one of the commenters in the Zika thread, who claims to have done research on the issue, there are no known species that feed primarily on mosquitoes. Therefore, eradicating them would probably not cause too much damage. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12324390 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12324390 Besides, we aren't talking about eradicating all mosquitoes. Only the few species that bite humans.
- frozenport 10y ago
  Unlike the Guinea worm, mosquitos are non-specific predators. Guinea worm can be eliminated by having a season without any humans infected, the only way to get rid of mosquitoes is to kill, every single one.
- rdl 10y ago
  I'm absolutely ok with eliminating most (or all, really) species of mosquitoes. I'm optimistic that in the (very near) future the ability to do this rests with a few people who decide it is worth doing, and worth spending single digit millions of dollars to do it, vs. any organization with a deliberative, democratic process. It would be hilarious to successfully wipe out mosquitoes and then have people try to sue (or governments attempt criminal charges).
- ufo 10y ago
  Erradicating a parasite like the the guinea worm is a bit like erradicating Smallpox or Polio. The ecossystem impact that you would expect is a change in human population due to the improved health. However, we consider it more ethical to control the size of the human population with voluntary birth control instead of terrible diseases :)
kpwagner 10y ago
Neal DeGrasse Tyson did an interview with Jimmy Carter on his podcast (Startalk); the interview covered the guinea worm in detail--very interesting.
praptak 10y ago
I wonder how much danger there is of the worm finding a new host species. I mean an animal other than dog and possibly harder to control. That would be a disastrous outcome.
- lovemenot 10y ago
  Little danger, I guess. The eradication program introduces no new evolutionary pressure on worms' lavae living in water. Those filtered out or killed in their hosts are removed from the gene pool anyway. On the other hand, we may discover more such preexisting hosts, as dogs. A parasitic relationship that evolved over a much longer period than a few mere decades and evolving from a much larger population than the few individuals thought to remain in the wild.
  - appleflaxen 10y ago
    > introduces no new evolutionary pressure on worms' lavae living in water not being able to reproduce (by infecting a human, which is required in the reproductive cycle) is just as real of a new evolutionary pressure as dying is.
bertil 10y ago
I remember a story about a worm that is extracted using a stick: the worm is presented with the stick, wrap itself around it and you can pull it out. Presumably, that image of a long animal around a stick as a healing process is what gave the caducean, the symbol to medicine of a snake around a stick. Anyone familiar with anything like this?
- maxerickson 10y ago
  Wrapping it on a stick is the traditional treatment for Guinea Worm. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rod_of_Asclepius#Theories https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rod_of_Asclepius#Theories
- throw_away 10y ago
  I was not aware of this before a long trip through wikipedia (triggered because I'd never seen that word before), but there's apparently some controversy over use of the Caduceus vs the Rod of Asclepius. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caduceus_as_a_symbol_of_medicine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caduceus_as_a_symbol_of_medici... Basically, the US Army used it by mistake and so it's taken over in the United States, but people think that the one-snake version (RoA) is more correct. The RoA is thought to be perhaps rooted in the treatment for Guinea Worm (or else based on a magical healing snake kept by Moses).
- Aelinsaar 10y ago
  I would suggest that you not google image search that, as I did. There are many modern results, and it's quite awful.
  - DonHopkins 10y ago
    Thank you! Preventative eyewash is the best eyewash. Instead, google image search for: Jimmy Carter for Cancer Survivor https://www.google.com/search?q=jimmy+carter+for+cancer+survivor&source=lnms&tbm=isch https://www.google.com/search?q=jimmy+carter+for+cancer+surv...
  - bertil 10y ago
    Yup: girlfriend is an MD, I learnt the hard way to deactivate Google Image before any medical search. I would ban any relation to dermatology from GI if I could.
ufo 10y ago
Great news, although I suspect the Save the Guinea Worm Foundation may not agree with me: http://www.deadlysins.com/guinea-worm/ http://www.deadlysins.com/guinea-worm/
- Kenji 10y ago
  Haha, that's kinda cute. Does the author of this piece volunteer as a host for the worms?
  - tim333 10y ago
    >There is no vaccine for Guinea worm, because the parasite induces no immune response. The lack of immune response could be interesting to investigate scientifically for designing implants. I'm sure the Save the Guinea Worm guy would be delighted to play host as you suggest.
    - ufo 10y ago
      More importantly than implants, a better understanding of the immune response against worms would help the development of vaccines. There are other parasitic worms out there, such as schistossoma, that we are nowhere near from erradicating and for which a vaccine would help tremendously. However, researchers unfortunately do not get much funding to study these neglected tropical diseases...
- GFK_of_xmaspast 10y ago
  Christ, what an asshole.
  - ufo 10y ago
    Its satire :)
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- BearOso 10y ago
rer 10y ago
It's an actual worm. The male Guinea worm dies, but the female worm incubates in a person’s body for a year, where it grows three to five feet long. It forms a horribly painful and itchy blister until it erupts through the flesh of the legs, arms or even chest
woliveirajr 10y ago
> There is no vaccine for Guinea worm, because the parasite induces no immune response. So, eradicating it might lead to the loss of some knowledge, on how it doesn't trigger some immune response. Specially because if you pull the worm, it retracts and causes infection, so the mechanism might not be that simple. Even more: few years ago (2013) [1], it was expected that soon it would have been eliminated, because dogs had their own species of guinea worm and wouldn't substitute human beings as the necessarily step in the worm life cycle. [1] http://phenomena.nationalgeographic.com/2013/01/24/the-guinea-worm http://phenomena.nationalgeographic.com/2013/01/24/the-guine...

118 points by dpflan 10y ago

Going back to the conversations we've had in the Zika thread[1], why are we OK with eliminating the Guinea Worm, but not certain species of mosquitoes? [1]https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12322885 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12322885 A lot of people in that thread made the argument that we shouldn't exterminate a species without first fully understanding the consequences. Yet we seem to be doing that here with this parasite, and no one seems to be saying, "but... think of the ecosystem!"

Roritharr 10y ago
As a contrarian in these topics, without being able to prove it, i assume that nothing terribly Bad can come from exterminating a species, even if it were bees, and their connections to the ecosystem are well understood. Nature is a rough place as niches tend to fill up extremely fast. So if we were to exterminate mosquitos, my gut says we'd survive it. But luckily my gut doesnt make Policy.
- ufo 10y ago
  Nature rebalances extremely fast but its does so by catastrophically changing into a different state instead of having old niches be refilled. One of the famous examples is how experimentally removing starfish (a sea urchin predator) from a kelp forest resulted in an explosion of the sea urchin population and a transformation of the kelp forest into a "sea urchin desert". There was a nice article linked in HN about this recently: http://nautil.us/issue/37/currents/the-ecologist-who-threw-starfish-rp http://nautil.us/issue/37/currents/the-ecologist-who-threw-s... https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11824375 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11824375
dpflan 10y ago
I agree with the idea of the unknown consequences of eliminating pieces of ecosystems. We've seen the impact of the removal of apex predators like wolves, and movements like rewilding champion the idea of reintroduction, rebalancing of the ecosystem through brining such animals back. So we seem to think that maintaining ecosystems is important now. Complexity theory and modeling could be very useful to "estimating" the impact of eradication, I'm not sure how the impact is being evaluated though. (In the future can man-made animals step in and play vital positions in ecosystems, like biological shims when we realize the importance or primary role a species played within that ecosystem?) Rewilding References: 1. Reintroducing Wolves in Scotland: http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-33017511 http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-33017511 2. Wiki: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rewilding_(conservation_biology) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rewilding_(conservation_biolog... 3. Rewilding Institute: http://rewilding.org/rewildit/ http://rewilding.org/rewildit/
- ufo 10y ago
  The obvious ecological impact of erradicating the guinea worm is decreased pressure on the population of Humans. However, most people would agree that it is not ethical to intentionally allow diseases to roam free as a way to control the size of human populations...
rch 10y ago
With mosquitos the discussion does tend to meander around what I see as the core issue: the wisdom of developing and field testing a technology capable of eradicating a target species. http://www.nature.com/nbt/journal/v34/n1/full/nbt.3439.html http://www.nature.com/nbt/journal/v34/n1/full/nbt.3439.html
maxerickson 10y ago
One factor is that there is a lot less "we" involved with the Guinea Worm. I mean, good luck suppressing the knowledge that filtering your drinking water through a cloth prevents a devastating episode where a 3 foot worm crawls out of your body. The proposed programs for eradicating mosquitoes involve things like releasing millions of dollars of genetically modified mosquitoes and putting larvicides and insecticides in all known bodies of standing water.
- chr1 10y ago
  Using gene drive doesn't require releasing huge number of modified mosquitos, and doesn't require larvicides.
Natsu 10y ago
The fact that we've unintentionally wiped out so many species lends credence to the idea that, on average, very few individual specie are all that important. Of course, just leave it to us to find the exception someday...
- TillE 10y ago
  And introduced destructive species like kudzu and the grey squirrel. These have results which are certainly bad, but far far away from causing any kind of catastrophic ecological collapse.
  - hackbinary 10y ago
    The demise of the Red Squirrel (in the UK) maybe more due the the loss of habitat than than because of the Grey Squirrel. The Grey Squirrel may just be a convenient scapegoat. http://www.forestry.gov.uk/fr/infd-8c8bhc http://www.forestry.gov.uk/fr/infd-8c8bhc
HippoViolation 10y ago
ok captain picard
- sctb 10y ago
  Please don't comment like this here. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
bertil 10y ago
Mosquitoes are an essential part of the diet of many species: birds, spiders, toads, small rodents. The assumption is that those species could find replacements, but it is still a major change. The Guinea worm presumably does not represent a significant ecological step.
- enraged_camel 10y ago
  >>Mosquitoes are an essential part of the diet of many species: birds, spiders, toads, small rodents. The assumption is that those species could find replacements, but it is still a major change. According to one of the commenters in the Zika thread, who claims to have done research on the issue, there are no known species that feed primarily on mosquitoes. Therefore, eradicating them would probably not cause too much damage. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12324390 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12324390 Besides, we aren't talking about eradicating all mosquitoes. Only the few species that bite humans.
frozenport 10y ago
Unlike the Guinea worm, mosquitos are non-specific predators. Guinea worm can be eliminated by having a season without any humans infected, the only way to get rid of mosquitoes is to kill, every single one.
rdl 10y ago
I'm absolutely ok with eliminating most (or all, really) species of mosquitoes. I'm optimistic that in the (very near) future the ability to do this rests with a few people who decide it is worth doing, and worth spending single digit millions of dollars to do it, vs. any organization with a deliberative, democratic process. It would be hilarious to successfully wipe out mosquitoes and then have people try to sue (or governments attempt criminal charges).
ufo 10y ago
Erradicating a parasite like the the guinea worm is a bit like erradicating Smallpox or Polio. The ecossystem impact that you would expect is a change in human population due to the improved health. However, we consider it more ethical to control the size of the human population with voluntary birth control instead of terrible diseases :)

kpwagner 10y ago

Neal DeGrasse Tyson did an interview with Jimmy Carter on his podcast (Startalk); the interview covered the guinea worm in detail--very interesting.

praptak 10y ago

I wonder how much danger there is of the worm finding a new host species. I mean an animal other than dog and possibly harder to control. That would be a disastrous outcome.

lovemenot 10y ago
Little danger, I guess. The eradication program introduces no new evolutionary pressure on worms' lavae living in water. Those filtered out or killed in their hosts are removed from the gene pool anyway. On the other hand, we may discover more such preexisting hosts, as dogs. A parasitic relationship that evolved over a much longer period than a few mere decades and evolving from a much larger population than the few individuals thought to remain in the wild.
- appleflaxen 10y ago
  > introduces no new evolutionary pressure on worms' lavae living in water not being able to reproduce (by infecting a human, which is required in the reproductive cycle) is just as real of a new evolutionary pressure as dying is.

bertil 10y ago

I remember a story about a worm that is extracted using a stick: the worm is presented with the stick, wrap itself around it and you can pull it out. Presumably, that image of a long animal around a stick as a healing process is what gave the caducean, the symbol to medicine of a snake around a stick. Anyone familiar with anything like this?

maxerickson 10y ago
Wrapping it on a stick is the traditional treatment for Guinea Worm. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rod_of_Asclepius#Theories https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rod_of_Asclepius#Theories
throw_away 10y ago
I was not aware of this before a long trip through wikipedia (triggered because I'd never seen that word before), but there's apparently some controversy over use of the Caduceus vs the Rod of Asclepius. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caduceus_as_a_symbol_of_medicine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caduceus_as_a_symbol_of_medici... Basically, the US Army used it by mistake and so it's taken over in the United States, but people think that the one-snake version (RoA) is more correct. The RoA is thought to be perhaps rooted in the treatment for Guinea Worm (or else based on a magical healing snake kept by Moses).
Aelinsaar 10y ago
I would suggest that you not google image search that, as I did. There are many modern results, and it's quite awful.
- DonHopkins 10y ago
  Thank you! Preventative eyewash is the best eyewash. Instead, google image search for: Jimmy Carter for Cancer Survivor https://www.google.com/search?q=jimmy+carter+for+cancer+survivor&source=lnms&tbm=isch https://www.google.com/search?q=jimmy+carter+for+cancer+surv...
- bertil 10y ago
  Yup: girlfriend is an MD, I learnt the hard way to deactivate Google Image before any medical search. I would ban any relation to dermatology from GI if I could.

ufo 10y ago

Great news, although I suspect the Save the Guinea Worm Foundation may not agree with me: http://www.deadlysins.com/guinea-worm/ http://www.deadlysins.com/guinea-worm/

Kenji 10y ago
Haha, that's kinda cute. Does the author of this piece volunteer as a host for the worms?
- tim333 10y ago
  >There is no vaccine for Guinea worm, because the parasite induces no immune response. The lack of immune response could be interesting to investigate scientifically for designing implants. I'm sure the Save the Guinea Worm guy would be delighted to play host as you suggest.
  - ufo 10y ago
    More importantly than implants, a better understanding of the immune response against worms would help the development of vaccines. There are other parasitic worms out there, such as schistossoma, that we are nowhere near from erradicating and for which a vaccine would help tremendously. However, researchers unfortunately do not get much funding to study these neglected tropical diseases...
GFK_of_xmaspast 10y ago
Christ, what an asshole.
- ufo 10y ago
  Its satire :)
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
BearOso 10y ago

rer 10y ago

It's an actual worm. The male Guinea worm dies, but the female worm incubates in a person’s body for a year, where it grows three to five feet long. It forms a horribly painful and itchy blister until it erupts through the flesh of the legs, arms or even chest

woliveirajr 10y ago

> There is no vaccine for Guinea worm, because the parasite induces no immune response. So, eradicating it might lead to the loss of some knowledge, on how it doesn't trigger some immune response. Specially because if you pull the worm, it retracts and causes infection, so the mechanism might not be that simple. Even more: few years ago (2013) [1], it was expected that soon it would have been eliminated, because dogs had their own species of guinea worm and wouldn't substitute human beings as the necessarily step in the worm life cycle. [1] http://phenomena.nationalgeographic.com/2013/01/24/the-guinea-worm http://phenomena.nationalgeographic.com/2013/01/24/the-guine...