5 ms·
Two billion genetically modified mosquitos are about to be released in the US
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- tamaharbor 5y agoWhat could possibli go wrong?
- Hallucinaut 5y agoExperts in five years: Huh... that's the first thing that's ever gone wrong...
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- smt88 5y agoThat is a legitimate question that people have very seriously studied. What do you think could go wrong, exactly? We have accidentally caused thousands of species to go extinct. We might as well make a deadly, replaceable species go extinct on purpose.
- inkeddeveloper 5y agoIt’s all about balance. If someone had killed Hitler, would something worse had taken his place? Or, how about in Australia where a fence was constructed to keep dingos out of the south. But dingos are a predator to kangaroos so the kangaroo population increased and now they are overpopulated. Butterfly effect kind of thing.
- JumpCrisscross 5y ago> If someone had killed Hitler, would something worse had taken his place? Unlike Hitler, there are countless mosquitoes. That enabled scientists to do controlled experiments. (Something the Australians didn't do with the dingo fencing, either.) I don't have a strong opinion on this measure. But before supporting or criticizing it, I would at least glance at that evidence.
- smt88 5y agoBut these mosquitoes are: 1) invasive in North America, so they already took something native's place; 2) not going to be eradicated; 3) not the only mosquitoes in their habitats On top of that, the testing of this technique has gone well multiple times in the past.
- georgia_peach 5y agoWhat exactly are your qualifications for the large-scale policing of nature?
- datashaman 5y agoThey did it last year. It worked. Nothing went wrong. That’s why they’re doing it again this year.
- georgia_peach 5y ago
- smt88 5y agoAre you trying to allude to some kind of Gates-led conspiracy to... rid the world of some of its deadliest diseases?
- georgia_peach 5y agoSome of us have our doubts about private companies and known scoundrels running experiments on US populations without their consent. https://www.the-scientist.com/news-opinion/gm-mosquito-progeny-not-dying-in-brazil--study-66434 https://www.the-scientist.com/news-opinion/gm-mosquito-proge...
- smt88 5y agoThat study was a lie, as the first paragraph of your link clearly states. It was disowned by its own publishers.
- georgia_peach 5y agoPublishers != Authors https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-019-49660-6 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-019-49660-6 vs https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-020-62398-w https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-020-62398-w Throwing enough money around has a tendency to incorrectly flip those Ts and Fs. And trusty Ctrl-F does not substantiate your choice of word "lie".
- smt88 5y ago> Publishers != Authors I agree! Perhaps you should actually read the criticism of this study, which also came from one of the authors[1][2]. So now we have Yale (the lead author's institution), the journal itself, and a co-author who all say that the conclusion in the paper is false. What is a false statement that someone makes despite knowing that their data does not support it? It is a lie. 1. https://www.science.org/content/article/dissent-splits-authors-provocative-transgenic-mosquito-study https://www.science.org/content/article/dissent-splits-autho... 2. https://allianceforscience.cornell.edu/blog/2019/09/speculative-scientific-paper-drives-false-media-reports-gmo-mosquitoes/ https://allianceforscience.cornell.edu/blog/2019/09/speculat...
- zgralk35y 5y ago
- missedthecue 5y agoExcuse me?
- assttoasstmgr 5y agoAre they ill-tempered?