5 ms·

This is not my field and my understanding of it is limited to high school science, but a picture being painted for me as a naive consumer of scientific news is

by madrox 4y ago

This is not my field and my understanding of it is limited to high school science, but a picture being painted for me as a naive consumer of scientific news is that we're seeing evidence that viruses are playing a role in evolution. We get infected with things that alter our DNA, and sometimes those alterations give us advantages. It leads me to wonder if there's a role mosquitos play in our ecosystem after all. It's long held that mosquitos serve no positive purpose in ecosystems and ought to be eradicated when possible. When confronting the affects of malaria, it's hard to argue against the idea, but it's certainly true that mosquitos are an effective virus delivery mechanism. If sometimes viruses play to our advantage, maybe there's more to the insect's role. Or maybe I just need to read more.

clolege 4y ago
> mosquitos serve no positive purpose in ecosystems and ought to be eradicated when possible I've heard the same, but it really feels like a naïve take. We can't know for sure that they have no positive purpose in their ecosystems, and eradicating them is a one way street. No idea where the belief came from, but it's a bit concerning how widely held it is.
- madrox 4y ago
  This is, of course, the counterargument to eradication, which is what leads me to muse on it
- alar44 4y ago
  As I've read it, it's always regarding the food chain. I've never seen a paper that said mosquitos were completely inconsequential, just that if they were completely removed, the food chain wouldn't be damaged.
- yarg 4y ago
  Somewhat tangentially, a mosquito eradication effort increased the rates of Dengue hemorrhagic fever - the opposite of what was intended. With Dengue, if the body is exposed to multiple strains within a short time period, there's no severe reaction. However, if there's a delay, and the body gets to prepare, and then sees a slightly different Dengue virus, the shit hits the fan. So the decreased number of mosquitos left a greater mean time between cross-strain exposure, which in turn increased the number of severe reactions.
  - a1369209993 4y ago
    That's not a argument against mosquito eradication, though; that's a argument against not finishing a mosquito eradication.
    - yarg 4y ago
      No, it's an argument against partial mosquito eradication - which is an intermediate step for complete eradication.
  - fellowniusmonk 4y ago
    Is this what you're trying to cite? If so.... the resurgence in populations is what caused the increase. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3516305/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3516305/
    - yarg 4y ago
      I'm not sure, but my recollection of the article in question is quite specific - that when there was a delay between exposures across strains, the hemorrhagic fever did not result. This article (The Autoimmune Mechanism in Dengue Hemorrhagic Fever) https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29686179/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29686179/ is probably more relevant. Why cross-strain exposure would prevent that auto-immune reaction, I have no idea - probably something to do with tiny little puzzle pieces that almost fit. (And no real need for the condescension.)

by madrox 4y ago

clolege 4y ago

> mosquitos serve no positive purpose in ecosystems and ought to be eradicated when possible I've heard the same, but it really feels like a naïve take. We can't know for sure that they have no positive purpose in their ecosystems, and eradicating them is a one way street. No idea where the belief came from, but it's a bit concerning how widely held it is.

madrox 4y ago
This is, of course, the counterargument to eradication, which is what leads me to muse on it
alar44 4y ago
As I've read it, it's always regarding the food chain. I've never seen a paper that said mosquitos were completely inconsequential, just that if they were completely removed, the food chain wouldn't be damaged.
yarg 4y ago
Somewhat tangentially, a mosquito eradication effort increased the rates of Dengue hemorrhagic fever - the opposite of what was intended. With Dengue, if the body is exposed to multiple strains within a short time period, there's no severe reaction. However, if there's a delay, and the body gets to prepare, and then sees a slightly different Dengue virus, the shit hits the fan. So the decreased number of mosquitos left a greater mean time between cross-strain exposure, which in turn increased the number of severe reactions.
- a1369209993 4y ago
  That's not a argument against mosquito eradication, though; that's a argument against not finishing a mosquito eradication.
  - yarg 4y ago
    No, it's an argument against partial mosquito eradication - which is an intermediate step for complete eradication.
- fellowniusmonk 4y ago
  Is this what you're trying to cite? If so.... the resurgence in populations is what caused the increase. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3516305/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3516305/
  - yarg 4y ago
    I'm not sure, but my recollection of the article in question is quite specific - that when there was a delay between exposures across strains, the hemorrhagic fever did not result. This article (The Autoimmune Mechanism in Dengue Hemorrhagic Fever) https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29686179/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29686179/ is probably more relevant. Why cross-strain exposure would prevent that auto-immune reaction, I have no idea - probably something to do with tiny little puzzle pieces that almost fit. (And no real need for the condescension.)