4 ms·

meanwhile a mosquito net will save 10x live as /10 the cost.

chr1 8y ago
Very soon gene drive eliminating all the mosquitos will save many more lives than a mosquito net can save at the fraction of cost and effort. But we would not be able to find it if we were only spending resources on things that save the maximal number of lives in the short term.
- isostatic 8y ago
  Is eliminating an entire species a good thing?
  - jdhawk 8y ago
    Lots of conflicting information here, but the TL;DR - probably, but maybe not.
  - jfk13 8y ago
    Much depends on your definition of "good", I expect. Even setting aside the possibility of unforeseen negative side-effects of the change to ecosystems, etc., it's not clear to me that minimising human sickness is an absolute "good" that outweighs any other effects, and it's not clear how we should evaluate the deliberate extinction of another species. How many human lives must be saved to justify an extinction? (Of course, those human lives aren't really "saved" in a long-term sense; they're still going to die, just from some other cause. Meanwhile, the extinct species remains permanently extinct.) How many species can we justify eliminating in order to stop a given disease? One? Tens? Hundreds? Thousands? Does the answer depend on whether they're cute and furry?
- gnu8 8y ago
  I’m still really alarmed by the idea of the gene drive. Suppose eliminating mosquitos has unintended consequences, such as the loss of species that feed on them, or other species that rely on their existence in some way we don’t understand yet? But also, gene drive itself is really spooky? What happens when someone truly evil decides to use it to get rid of all the people of the ethnicity they dislike? How are we going to deal with that?
  - ben_w 8y ago
    If I understand correctly, gene drives maximise individual reproductive genetic success in a way which eventually makes a species unviable. I think the specific proposal for mosquitoes is to have a female-chromosome-specific gene which forces all offspring to be female and to carry that same gene. This takes many generations to wipe out a species; only a genocidal maniac who believes The Other are literally another species would consider it; and the capacity to create it is also the capacity to reverse it.
adrianN 8y ago
Perhaps you should compare mosquito nets to condoms.
- Cthulhu_ 8y ago
  There's no religious institution prohibiting the use of mosquito nets though.
  - nilskidoo 8y ago
    I've worked in kitchens where hairnets over beards was mandatory though.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]

chr1 8y ago

Very soon gene drive eliminating all the mosquitos will save many more lives than a mosquito net can save at the fraction of cost and effort. But we would not be able to find it if we were only spending resources on things that save the maximal number of lives in the short term.

isostatic 8y ago
Is eliminating an entire species a good thing?
- jdhawk 8y ago
  Lots of conflicting information here, but the TL;DR - probably, but maybe not.
- jfk13 8y ago
  Much depends on your definition of "good", I expect. Even setting aside the possibility of unforeseen negative side-effects of the change to ecosystems, etc., it's not clear to me that minimising human sickness is an absolute "good" that outweighs any other effects, and it's not clear how we should evaluate the deliberate extinction of another species. How many human lives must be saved to justify an extinction? (Of course, those human lives aren't really "saved" in a long-term sense; they're still going to die, just from some other cause. Meanwhile, the extinct species remains permanently extinct.) How many species can we justify eliminating in order to stop a given disease? One? Tens? Hundreds? Thousands? Does the answer depend on whether they're cute and furry?
gnu8 8y ago
I’m still really alarmed by the idea of the gene drive. Suppose eliminating mosquitos has unintended consequences, such as the loss of species that feed on them, or other species that rely on their existence in some way we don’t understand yet? But also, gene drive itself is really spooky? What happens when someone truly evil decides to use it to get rid of all the people of the ethnicity they dislike? How are we going to deal with that?
- ben_w 8y ago
  If I understand correctly, gene drives maximise individual reproductive genetic success in a way which eventually makes a species unviable. I think the specific proposal for mosquitoes is to have a female-chromosome-specific gene which forces all offspring to be female and to carry that same gene. This takes many generations to wipe out a species; only a genocidal maniac who believes The Other are literally another species would consider it; and the capacity to create it is also the capacity to reverse it.

adrianN 8y ago

Perhaps you should compare mosquito nets to condoms.

Cthulhu_ 8y ago
There's no religious institution prohibiting the use of mosquito nets though.
- nilskidoo 8y ago
  I've worked in kitchens where hairnets over beards was mandatory though.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]