What's new
US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Zika outbreak carried by genetically altered mosquitos

Status
Not open for further replies.

Rustic

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 3, 2015
Messages
58,771
Reaction score
5,881
Points
1,940

Polar%20Bear%20by%20Carla%20Lombardo%20Ehrlich


This shapeshifting fella is the culprit... Manbearpig
 

emilynghiem

Constitutionalist / Universalist
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 21, 2010
Messages
22,826
Reaction score
3,623
Points
290
Location
National Freedmen's Town District

Zika Outbreak Epicenter In Same Area Genetically-Modified Mosquitoes Released In 2015 | Zero Hedge

This article explains it could be the presence of tetracycline in the food chain, making the
mosquito survival rate 15% instead of 3-5%. If the genetic mosquito cannot fly more than 400 meters,
this may increase the spread of "human-to-human" zika virus through mosquitos in a close region
(while it still did reduce the overall population by 80% and thus reduce incidence of other diseases of dengue fever, malaria, etc. that aren't carried human to human like Zika is)

I thought they were introducing this mosquito that kills off its own population by
making the newly hatched mosquitos unable to leave the water because they could not fly at all.

UCI News - Flightless mosquitoes help control dengue fever


The graphs I saw showed the population plummeting quickly to 0, almost exponentially.
So the concern at that time was killing them off completely:

Genetic genocide: Genetically altered mosquito warriors could wipe out humanity's biggest killer

Genetic hacking - a brilliant solution said:
American scientist Anthony James, from UC Irvine, has made mosquito genetics the focus of his career - and his latest invention is a genetically modified mosquito designed to bring populations of Aedes aegypti down from within.
In short, the modified genes affect only the female mosquitoes, rendering them flightless. The larvae hatch on the water, and the females are unable to leave, rendering them harmless to humans and leaving them to die. The males are unaffected, so they mature normally, then mate with other females to pass the genetic modification on.

It's an extremely effective way of triggering a mosquito population crash - James and his colleagues have proven in cage-based testing in Mexico that a sufficient number of genetically hacked males can completely decimate a mosquito population within a few months. The table below shows this genetic genocide in action - within 23 and 33 weeks, the genetically modified males managed to completely destroy the otherwise stable mosquito population in James' test cages.

This is the first I read about 3-5% surviving to adulthood to breed; and now this 15%
rate due to tetracycline present in animals that the mosquito feeds on.

Now it looks like they may have to kill that breed off completely to stop this mess.
Once people carry Zika it cannot be removed from their bloodstream. So a mosquito that bites a carrier
can spread it to someone else and so on. You'd have to kill off any mosquito that can do that?

Until scientists develop something that can kill off the Zika virus in people?

Maybe spiritual healing can raise up someone's natural immunity to kill off an unnatural virus.
(I've heard of people with HIV or even AIDS raise their immune systems enough to kill that off and retest at zero. So if the immune system can be boosted to kill of HIV/AIDS maybe it can kill off Zika, Ebola, West Nile etc. Otherwise, Ebola survivors still continue suffering health problems, including potential blindness. West Nile may also be carried even after symptoms subside, and could still continue to tax or destroy organs fighting off the disease.)

I could see scientists saving enough of each breed of mosquito in a lab for repopulating later, but wiping out the current mosquitoes until these viruses are under control. And after this situation is stabilized, releasing and returning the mosquitoes back to their normal proportions of each species.
 
Last edited:

emilynghiem

Constitutionalist / Universalist
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 21, 2010
Messages
22,826
Reaction score
3,623
Points
290
Location
National Freedmen's Town District

my2¢

So it goes
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
May 14, 2010
Messages
11,102
Reaction score
2,749
Points
290
Location
State 48
We'll never learn.
them-movie-620x248.jpg
 

emilynghiem

Constitutionalist / Universalist
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 21, 2010
Messages
22,826
Reaction score
3,623
Points
290
Location
National Freedmen's Town District

I think that can be contained more readily, just like people who find out they have HIV or AIDS
can manage not to infect others.

But trying to control mosquito populations from 'biting a Zika carrier and then biting someone else' sounds much more difficult to manage without killing off that "
Aedes aegypti" mosquito in that region altogether.

I don't think you have to kill of people to stop them from spreading diseases to each other.
But this mosquito may need to be, for now (but in a way it could be brought back later?).

What are you going to do, isolate all the people carrying Zika so no mosquito can bite them and bite someone else? How can you contain that?

At least until something can kill off the Zika virus inside the human body so that person no longer carries or spreads it.
 

OKTexas

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2012
Messages
53,549
Reaction score
12,155
Points
2,220
Location
Near Magnolia, TX

I think that can be contained more readily, just like people who find out they have HIV or AIDS
can manage not to infect others.

But trying to control mosquito populations from 'biting a Zika carrier and then biting someone else' sounds much more difficult to manage without killing off that "
Aedes aegypti" mosquito in that region altogether.

I don't think you have to kill of people to stop them from spreading diseases to each other.
But this mosquito may need to be, for now (but in a way it could be brought back later?).

What are you going to do, isolate all the people carrying Zika so no mosquito can bite them and bite someone else? How can you contain that?

At least until something can kill off the Zika virus inside the human body so that person no longer carries or spreads it.

Why is it you regressives tend to go to the absurd more than anyone else. Exactly where did I even remotely mention isolating anyone? Also in a healthy adult the body will take care of the virus, but there is a period of time that it can be transmitted person to person. Any person who knows they have the virus should only engage in safe sex until the danger has passed. Zika has been linked to birth defects.
 

emilynghiem

Constitutionalist / Universalist
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 21, 2010
Messages
22,826
Reaction score
3,623
Points
290
Location
National Freedmen's Town District

I think that can be contained more readily, just like people who find out they have HIV or AIDS
can manage not to infect others.

But trying to control mosquito populations from 'biting a Zika carrier and then biting someone else' sounds much more difficult to manage without killing off that "
Aedes aegypti" mosquito in that region altogether.

I don't think you have to kill of people to stop them from spreading diseases to each other.
But this mosquito may need to be, for now (but in a way it could be brought back later?).

What are you going to do, isolate all the people carrying Zika so no mosquito can bite them and bite someone else? How can you contain that?

At least until something can kill off the Zika virus inside the human body so that person no longer carries or spreads it.

Why is it you regressives tend to go to the absurd more than anyone else. Exactly where did I even remotely mention isolating anyone? Also in a healthy adult the body will take care of the virus, but there is a period of time that it can be transmitted person to person. Any person who knows they have the virus should only engage in safe sex until the danger has passed. Zika has been linked to birth defects.

I was saying sexual transmission is not the problem compared with mosquito transmission that people don't choose.

You confirmed the same point I was trying to make that the sexual transmission can be managed,
in comparison with the mosquitos.

So we agree, I wasn't disagreeing just saying it was not the problem, and you confirmed that in detail. Thanks!

BTW I wouldn't assume either Ebola or this Zika is only transmittable during a certain period.
They are still being studied, so I would err on the side of caution.

If two people get it, that's twice as many chances of the mosquito biting a carrier and creating more.

The issue still remains: how to kill off the Zika virus altogether, or kill of the mosquito that can carry it uncontrolled. The sex issue is not out of control, so that is not as big an issue as stopping the spread by insects.
 

Dont Taz Me Bro

Diamond Member
Staff member
Senior USMB Moderator
Moderator
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Nov 17, 2009
Messages
54,461
Reaction score
19,337
Points
2,290
Location
Las Vegas, Nevada
Closed. Wrong forum. One word does not cut it for OP commentary
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

USMB Server Goals

Total amount
$505.00
Goal
$350.00

New Topics

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top