In a democracy, we listen to everybody, respect everybody’s
opinion, but we go with the majority.
That’s not to say the majority is always right, because we
know that’s not the case.
But a lot of the time, the minority is just plain off-base. And
sometimes there are minimal risks that you’re willing to take for a major
benefit.
And there have already been murmurings in the Hawaiian
Islands about fighting any effort to use genetic techniques to fight
mosquitoes.
Ouch.
Here are three of the options. (There are others)
One. Do nothing, and let children be born with crippling
brain damage associated with Zika.
Two. Spray insecticides throughout the community. This also has
the beneficial effect of damaging roach, spider and ant populations, but will
also impact birds, pollinators and others.
Three. Then there is this targeted mechanism for attacking
only the individual species about which we’re concerned.
Here’s the website of one of the companies working on genetic modifications designed to reduce
mosquito populations.
Essentially, they release male mosquitoes that have been
bred to produce offspring that can’t survive. The males mate with wild females. And
the resulting mosquitoes die before they can breed or bite.
I’ve already heard an early, still-soft drumbeat of people
in Hawai`i opposing the use of genetically modified mosquitoes in the Islands.
But let’s look at some facts about skeeters in the Islands.
Mosquitoes are not from here. They are not native to the
Islands, so there’s no rare and endemic species issue with disappearing them.
They are annoying as heck, buzzing around your ears at
night, sucking your precious bodily fluids from any bare skin they can locate.
They spread disease to humans. Diseases like dengue and
Zika. And, oh shucks, let’s name a few more. Chikungunya, Yellow Fever,
Malaria, West Nile Virus, several kinds of encephalitis, and the horror of
filiariasis and the resulting disease, elephantiasis.
Mosquitoes spread disease to rare native birds, almost none
of which have resistance to mosquito-borne diseases like avian pox and avian
malaria. It may be the primary cause of the loss of our native forest birds.
Have you experienced the heartbreak of a dog suffering from
heartworm? Yes. Mosquito-spread.
If you reduce the mosquito count, it’s hard to imagine
anyone or anything that might be negatively impacted, besides some
mosquito-eating fish.
It’s not as if this is an untested process. It has already
been deployed in three South American countries and has dramatically reduced the
populations of the Zika mosquito, Aedes aegypti. And without negative impacts.
But the opposition is firm. Helen Wallace, of the British
environmental group
GeneWatch , pulls no punches in
this quote
from The New Yorker.
“This mosquito is Dr. Frankenstein’s monster, plain and
simple. To open a box and let these man-made creatures fly free is a risk with
dangers we haven’t even begun to contemplate.”
One of them: Don’t kill these mosquitoes, or other
mosquitoes might benefit.
Another: What if people swallowed one?
Another: If
you release a lot of mosquitoes, there will be more mosquitoes around for a
while.
Another: Maybe something else could be causing Zika, too, so study that
before trying to kill off mosquitoes.
There is a whole paralysis by analysis issue. You can always
find a new question, no matter how many have already been answered.
GeneWatch’s position seems to be to do nothing, but continue
studying until GeneWatch can come up with no more questions.
It’s not clear what the alternatives are. Letting people get
sick? Clouds of pesticides around homes? Irradiated mosquitoes?
In every major public issue, there are impacts of action and
impacts of inaction. On this one, the balance seems clearly to weight in favor
of action.
© Jan TenBruggencate 2016