We could kill all mosquitoes (but should we?)
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 12 июн 2024
- Malaria-carrying mosquitoes kill hundreds of thousands of people every year. Scientists have found a way to get rid of them by spreading a gene to wipe out mosquito populations. But is it a good idea?
Reporter: Louise Osborne
Video Editor: David Jacobi
Supervising Editor: Malte Rohwer-Kahlmann, Kiyo Dörrer & Joanna Gottschalk
Special thanks to: Wadzanayi Mandevenyi and Naima Sykes
We're destroying our environment at an alarming rate. But it doesn't need to be this way. Our new channel Planet A explores the shift towards an eco-friendly world - and challenges our ideas about what dealing with climate change means. We look at the big and the small: What we can do and how the system needs to change. Every Friday we'll take a truly global look at how to get us out of this mess.
#PlanetA #Malaria #Extinction
Read more:
Malaria facts: www.who.int/news-room/fact-sh...
Mosquitoes with gene drives study: www.nature.com/articles/s4146...
International treaties on biosafety: bch.cbd.int/protocol/
What purpose do mosquitoes serve? blog.nwf.org/2020/09/what-pur...
A world without mosquitoes: www.nature.com/articles/466432a
Control of invasive species: www.frontiersin.org/articles/...
The promise of gene drives: www.nature.com/articles/d4158...
Gene drives tested in mammals: www.nature.com/articles/d4158...
Chapters
00:00 Intro
00:48 Why are mosquitoes dangerous?
02:26 The fight against mosquitoes
06:53 Concerns and cons
7:54 Stopping the spread
8:36 Impact on the ecosystem
![PADDINGTON IN PERU - Official Trailer [4K] - Paddington Bear is back!](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/lKgitu25ZAg/mqdefault.jpg)
Would you wipe out mosquitoes if you could?
Yes
Yes, I went to Iceland at the end of June, there aren’t any mosquitos there. It was wonderful.
YES.
Selective types, sure. But they serve an important link in the food chain
Yeah. Either that or find a way to permanently neutralize their carrier status for dangerous and deadly diseases. If they can exist without the threat of death on others, then fine, whatever, **exist**
We've already unintentionally caused thousands of species to go extinct. Now do mosquitoes please.
EXACTLY.
They can just make the mosquitoes unable to carry malaria and the other diseases
@@elje0ett No I want them dead or unable to suck blood. That's the whole point. Malaria free world is the side bonus :D
Yeap, and the ecosystem hasn't collapsed. Now kill the mosquitoes.
@@elje0ett easier said, than done.
Yes we absolutely must make mosquitos go extinct.
We shouldn't eradicate all species, there would be a serious risk of badly damaging ecosystems.
But I'm 100% on board with eradicating carriers of deadly diseases.
Yes and in parts of Africa they should totally go ahead as this will save a lot of lives.
Just the dangerous ones of course
They are necessary for climate control. 😀😀
@@Awakening11174 yeah, getting rid of them will affect the environment a lot. They might be dangerous and kill a lot of people, but they shouldn’t go extinct.
its interesting to see people not affected by malaria to discuss malaria. i wonder if they would have a different opinion if they lived in a place with malaria and if they had lost close ones to malaria...
that just obnoxious people on yt, what do you expect
@@RobertBaraheon lol
I still wouldn't care, because nature.
Keeping the population of mosquitoes that carry Malaria down and finding a cure for Malaria is a more realistic solution. You dont want to destabilize the food web its already struggling with diminished insect populations.
Absolutelly, and we have already brought to extinction so many species by accident, and getting into the discution, if we could do it on porpouse to end the death of hundreds of thousands of vulnerable people (children under five years old included) why shouldn't we? I get it that some of those species of mosquitos help to polimerate plants, but in the end, life always finds a way (actually we have already used tecnologies to kill species before, not genetically of course, but people using the tecnologies of gunpowder and weapons we have driven species to extinction, like the wolf of tasmania and for the bad of the enviorioment) plants will long live after malaria and two of 3500 species of mosquitos are wipped out of this Earth.
The damage to the natural environment could not possibly come close to the damage at present controlling these mosquitoes with vast amounts of harmful pesticides that indiscriminately destroy vast numbers of non target insects and other creatures
If you're interested in pesticides, be sure to check out our video on the topic: Can we feed our population without synthetic pesticides? 👉 ruclips.net/video/_u_lo1NQGS8/видео.html
That sounds like the logic behind gambling: "If I have lost $1000 already, losing $100 couldn't hurt". We do have to deal with the pesticide issue, but it's independent from the mosquito issue.
@@meyer6891 How can it be independent of mosquito issue if the reason some pesticides are used are mosquitos?
@@fulconandroadcone9488 Because you don't need pesticides to control mosquitoes, nor use pesticides only to control mosquitoes.
@@meyer6891 Yet people still use pesticides for some reason.
Many people often forget that of the 3500 varieties of mosquitoes, only about 7 bite humans. Plus they often make up a tiny portion of the populations in which they live so if we killed off all 7 species it's not necessarily going to cause a catastrophe because there are other species that can take their place. In fact, many that bite humans live in places they aren't even native to, for instance here on the American continent most of the species that spread disease here are non-native, so destroying their populations here would be equivalent to getting rid of an invasive species and therefore little if any negative effect to the natural environment. That said I think we could do trial runs like here in the Americas and see if they work as they are non-native and would actually restore native mosquito populations. In places where they are native, I think we should keep some unaltered in a lab as a backup in case we need to restore the population. But as far as we can tell, the species that bite humans aren't exactly necessary for environments and have very little nutritional value for species there, as they are often an end species on the energy pyramid. However, research should still be done, in case by mistake we end up finding out that like wolfs in Yellowstone these species have a really important place in the ecosystem. Another possibility is that we could modify these species to avoid biting humans. With the number of deaths these species cause I think we should treat them as a threat to ourselves. This wouldn't be the first time we nearly killed off species that are super destructive to humans, the Guinea worm for instance only lives on and eats humans, but is spread sometimes by dogs. This animal's diet is basically us, and as such we have felt very little remorse for destroying it, and its eradication doesn't seem to have any negative effect on the environment that we can observe. So due to the fact, that there are so many other species of mosquitoes, the loss of just the ones that bite us, may or may not play a huge role in the environment as a whole, caution in all things, but I say with so many human lives on the line, we should at least try and look at it as an option and not be so quick to dismiss it. Maybe even try to use it to save human lives.
I do wanna point out they have done tests with this type of work that turned out successful before.
Do not bet on those outcomes, the connections are more numerous and far reaching than any human knows of.
You're wrong. It's not 7 out of 3500, but 7% out of 3500.
@@olwynskye417 There are only a relatively small number of mosquito species which are good at transmitting diseases to/amoung humans. Just getting rid of Anopheles gambiae, coluzzii, arabiensis, stephensi (main malaria vectors), and Aedes aegypti and maybe albopictus (dengue, yellow fever, ect. vectors) would make a massive difference.
BTW: There is a native Anopheles species in central California which can transmit malaria quite well. There just aren't enough humans with malaria there to keep up the infection cycle. We aren't sure exactly what it takes, but knocking out primary vectors combined with really ramping up treatment for a while is the idea. Getting rid of all of even a single one of these species would be extremely difficult... Knocking it down to a low enough level that we can keep malaria (and other diseases) under control is much more doable.
What if crossbreeding happens?
It only takes one and the chain reaction begins
If you live in the north, in the summer, the amount of mosquitoes can be unbelievably overwhelming. They are so abundant here in Finland, that they truly ruin the whole summer in some locations. You cannot step outside your house without considerable protection; try working outside heavy physical labour in summer heat in full body covering gear... Mosquitoes in your face, in your ear, sucking away till the last drop of tear. I say make them go away! (Ánd dont ruin our planet whilst doing it)
@@tobia5267 Generally areas with Boreal climates like Siberia and Alaska tend to host swarming mosquitoes that completely cover the air like a thick fog in the summer.
This makes me debate wanting to live in finland
@@tobia5267 wearing shorts? *wearing shorts?*
Watch our mosquitos in the north:
ruclips.net/video/T_aSlj-Ij5s/видео.html
Come to Kautokeino in Norway or Kiruna or Nikkaluokta in Sweden and wear your shorts.
@@tobia5267 They are not a problem in high altitude areas but are in low lying areas in Scandinavia.
You can always move! Do you understand how many species rely on em as food and other rely on those for food. You are probably one of those that use traps that kills everything within 200m and feel good about it. Yes, I am also from Finland and you can avoid em if you want so killing loads of species for your comfort is one stupid thought... If I would kill everything that annoys me there would be a lot less people like you living here :D :D
Yes. Every single biting species. The 99,8% of other species of non-biting mosquitoes are fine.
I think the gene modification to wipe out mosquitos is a brilliant idea. It's so pathetic that the guy who is campaigning against this to 'save genetic seeds' , lives in the comfort of Europe. He should be try living in a tropical country, let alone in poor parts of Africa
That's not what the concern is and there's no guarantee that "poor parts of Africa" will be better off if we start using the gene drive
People, especially post industrial people, are famously bad ecosystem engineers and we often, as with the case of climate change, fail to account for knock on impacts
What happens if the border between mosquito species is not as defined as we currently understand and we accidentally kill off the majority of the world's mosquitoes? We don't know and we can't predict the likelihood of this happening
The biggest issue here is that, once present, the gene drive as used can't really be recalled and if we do critical damage to species that we didn't mean to target the problem may be unfixable
tbf Europe has no shortage of mosquitoes, especially up North in areas with a tundra like Finland there are mosquito _swarms_ in the summer that pose a significant health risk.
We should help Africa and the tropical countries become wealthy enough to have good shelter.
@@marshalepage5330
I strongly agree.
If we're gonna have an excint african species why not the mosquitoe?
It sucks what the poachers are doing. To animal populations. But mosquitoes can at least be one that we can say "good riddance" to.
He is campaigning against gene modified mosquitoes because big pharmaceutical companies are making big money from malaria drugs.
I live in Vietnam, and both Australia as well. Mosquitos are a literal pain in the butt especially during the summer in Vietnam. Malaria patients can get a nightmare to healthcare workers and basically a disease that can wipe millions of people. Since my home country is humid, we get problems of mosquitos flying around and stealing our blood, let alone bringing dengue, and malaria to the table.
I would say, they suck a lot, they are pesky, and I would rather want them gone. I also agree for any means of taking out that little blood sucking insect, but not costing the planet at least.
i thought they removed the mosquitos in most part of Vietnam. which part do you live in?
@@Dave_of_Mordor Mosquitoes are still very prominent in Ho Chi Minh City and Da Lat. ESPECIALLY in Da Lat, however it’s still one of the most beautiful cities ever and is my family’s home city.
So take out the disease carrying mosquitoes, and let harmless ones live.
You'll still get bitten, birds will still eat, and millions of lives will be saved.
They are like most locals only like white skin. In a way, they are racist suckers.
@@Dave_of_Mordor a lot of areas.
In Singapore, we put bacteria in male Aedes aegypti mosquitoes and when they mate with female mosquito, they would not have any children, helping stop dengue and zika. So far it is effective,but dengue and Zika cases are still rising in Singapore.
I think every country should learn from SG and finish all the mosquitoes - then they will be no malaria, dengue, zika etc.
@@zhangruyi3153 agree
I'm not sure if it can be called effective if the diseases are rising. Worst case scenario: you're forcing the mosquitoes and the disease to evolve, making them even more dangerous.
@@meyer6891 places where this mosquitoes are not released, the cases in those area are rising. However places where the mosquitoes are released, the cases are coming down or slowing. Just shows that too little are released.
There is another effort to infect female Aedes aegipty with Wolbachia bacteria that can reduce the ability of dengue virus to reproduce inside the mosquito so there will be less virus to pass to human.
I went to Iceland at the end of June, there aren’t any mosquitos there. It was wonderful.
You missed them but there well there and there much smaller too.
@@julm7744
What?
You sure you are from Greenland?
In Summertime there's billions and billions of mosquitos roaming around All over.
@@thesilentone4024 that's so strange - in Alaska they are giant.
Yes but there are still clouds of bugs
@@CHMichael What they said isn’t true. They don’t have mosquitos there.
We eliminated the smallpox viruses and are on the doorstep of eliminating dracunculiasis (Guinea-worm disease). If eliminating cruel diseases helps humans live better lives, I’m all for it. Who knows… maybe some of the people saved will work hard at improving the environment, making this a positive for the ecosystem too.
Agreed besides the last part, generally a higher population = more strain on ecosystems
Yes. We should. If Malaria was still a problem in the US, we would have done it years ago
If Malaria stops being a problem anywhere in the world, suddenly the world would be quite overpopulated though. But no worries, not like we're already struggling with providing water and food to people around the world. I'm sure taking out the major natural population control mechanism won't lead to brutal wars at all.
1:09 mosquito most dangerous animal
2:12 anopoli malaria carrying
4:15 crispr
4:55 gene drive
6:50 potential containment issue
People who haven’t suffered from malaria should not decide if others should suffer
I would be ready to accept the consequences for the death of all mosquitos.
And as far as I know, mosquitos have a very limited impact of the food chain. Birds are the only main predator for them, but they only make up 2% of the diet.
Mosquitos are also important pollinators. Are you also willing to give up on that? I find that kind of selfish.
@@tomdeaardappel8303 Mosquitos are, but Anopheles on its own? Not so much. We absolutely should do more research for setting this loose, I wouldn't dismiss it out of hand. Malaria is a huge problem in Africa.
@@tomdeaardappel8303 I don’t care, whatever consequences that will have won’t kill 700K people every year
@willinton06 I care more about the world, and you care more about the species that is responsible for destroying the world and killing the most animals than a species has ever killed.
Little bats eat lots of them
How about creating protected populations of these and other deadly creatures. Something like seed banks. If their annihilation in the wild causes catastrophic results then they can be reintroduced or alternative methods found to alleviate the negative consequences.
I'm not trying to fault your reasoning, but in the scenario where we accidentally cause catastrophic results, we still have to live with them even if we backpedal...
I wait for every friday for your upload, thanks a bunch DW planet A team ❤️
I hope I can complete watching all your videos. They are just soooo informative.
Thank you! Be sure to subscribe so you don't miss any of our reports as they come out. We publish new videos every Friday ✨
I have subscribed looong ago !
I roam around to find interesting reports. Happy to see other curious Humans, too. ♡
Comment just to say that I love your channel! Keep up the great work!
Thank you! Be sure to subscribe for new videos every week 🙃
This is a really interesting subject for discussion. Thanks so much for sharing this video.
So glad you enjoyed it! Be sure to subscribe to our channel - we publish new videos every Friday ✨
Should we? Are people ignoring that we make many animal species extinct every year? By the thousands.. And we have made many thousands of animals extinct the last 10 000 years, estimates are at 150 000 the last 500 years. Nobody will miss a few more ecosystems
And the rise of diseases and plagues is the path evolution is being forced to take that way.
Eliminate them. Consequences be damned.
Uh, oh, you're promoting Climate Change?
@@Diana1000Smiles Yes I Am
You surely do not understand the consequences then.
@@animallvr87 no one gives a fuccccck
I feel like this is a species we could stand to lose.
Normally DW Planet A videos are quite in depth, or at least I can begin to understand the implications. However, I found myself with more questions than answers at the end of this video. For example: Even with a Gene drive, the change is that the mosquitoes can't feed on humans, right? Could they not feed on other animals (and therefore not be sterile)? Even with the mosquitoes, if the proportion of the modified mosquito population was low enough, what happens to them? Are they stable? Does the sterile population just die off, leaving a smaller overall population?
mate go outside and touch grass
Humans are the easiest animals to feed on for a mosquito, due to their thin skins. Hence, if a mosquito can't feed on humans, it won't be able to feed on anything else.
@@moonshot3159 grass is a waste of water
@@somethingsomething404 unless the species is actually not native to the environment it ain't that bad. Screw American lawns tho
One question:
Why aren't the malaria parasites rather than the moskitos the main target of the gene drive proponents?
Well it's not just malaria, it's also Sika, Yellow fever, West Nile. It's killing 4 birds with one stone.
Thats not possible with our current technology.
In here, all mosquitoes make silly noise at night. Making it impossible to sleep. Which can cause fever during the day and affect productivity. It's not just about the bite and the malaria. They all have to die.
@@10thcode Use mosquitoe nets and sleep like a baby. Don't leave gaps. Tuck the egde of nets under the mattress.
Agreed. It is much harder to do that but science should pursue this. We risk ecological collapse if we eliminate mosquitos.
I am quarantining after a COVID-19 positive self test. I live in Malaysia so every time I step outdoors, normally, the mosquitoes attack aggressively, especially early evening. However, I just noticed, in the past couple of days (since I tested positive), the mosquitoes don't come near me when I go out to feed my chickens. (I wash my hands with antiseptic soap so I don't infect the chickens!) I think science needs to study this or is it a fluke?
It's the soap. Especially if you don't wash it off properly. I do this. Apply the soap, and DON'T wash it off. It's dripping wet, but I'm outside. Homemade mozzie repellent. Tested in Gombak and Selayang. Long standing dengue red zones. 😁
Something like this is needed, in test locations studying it for long years for the consequences. Only after understanding the bigger picture should it become global.
Burke : Okay, I know this is an emotional moment for all of us, okay? I know that. But let's not make snap judgments, please. This is clearly... clearly an important species we're dealing with and I don't think that you or I, or *anybody*, has the right to arbitrarily exterminate them.
Ripley : [laughs feebly] Wrong.
Private Vasquez : Yeah. Watch us.
Important species? What's the benefit of having them?
@@rayleeaustralia Efficient nutrition cycles. What's the benefit in humans?
@@isoinic4575 not much either. At least get the itch out of those damn humans for now
@@isoinic4575 Irrelevant question. The goal at issue is the survival of intelligent life. Any benefits of an action are measured in respect to how it furthers that goal. Humanity, being an intelligent species, makes up part of that objective and thus its utility is not under consideration. Unless it would mortally endanger others, saving a single person is worth more than the lives of all extant mosquitos combined. One is free to think differently, but such an agenda is unlikely to receive wide support and be made effective while intelligent life (thus the individuals who can take action) is normally keen on self-preservation.
I live in south west France. There used to be normal mosquitoes until about 3 years ago first tiger mosquitoes appeared. Now there are only tiger mosquitoes and the old ones are completely gone.
Here in California you can't even work on your car without getting bit 4-5 times.
There are natural mosquito repellents, some plants. It is all we need to do, is to repel them. It does not kill them, only repelling. Here, in Quebec and Ontario, Canada, anyway, there is the "white cedar" tree, which is not a real cedar, but it is called the white cedar. If you check for that name at Wikipedia, then you get a disambiguation page, and I don't know which is the right one for here. I learned this from an outdoor/wilderness guide in Ottawa, Ontario, we just had to take a little handful of the compressed leaves (not needles), crush this between the palms of our hands, spread the essential oil on ourselves, and this greatly worked. The woman/guide also had some flimsy looking plant growing next to her house and this also greatly worked for repelling mosquitoes, but I'm not sure if it would be called oil and don't recall the name of the plant. Both smelled very nice and mosquitoes couldn't tolerate either, once we got the essential oils. Mosquitoes would land on white cedar trees, as long as the trees did not excrete their oil, for once the trees did that, you would see the mosquitoes take off fast. The oil smelled good to me, but it apparently is not a real cedar, called "white cedar", but apparently not a real cedar. Among plants, we are bound to find many remedies, including good ones for us without harming the environment.
Remember that such effective natural repellants are not widely available in the malaria infested countries under discussion here. I lived for a few years in Cameroon, and all you find there are toxic sprays and citronella candles, neither of which are very effective. Mosquito nets work well but evidently only when you're in bed.
Human lives are worth more than mosquitos, and this only wipes out 1/3500 species. While we sit and debate this, people are dying, it should be done, no doubt in my mind.
You'd rather people were dying from starvation and wars for water, as overpopulation becomes a problem?
@@ryyvia7234 overpopulation is a myth. Most big countries are in decline, birth rates seem to settle around 1.7 in developed places. It's a non issue, and the faster we fix places the few kids they have. Getting rid of malaria is a good thing and won't lead to war or famine.
Death to the mosquitoes !!! Pollination and other things, well... as Dr. Ian Malcolm so eloquently put..."Life ...finds a way".
Diseases could also find a way. They're alive.
did you know mosquitoes have no toes?
this is so sad... i hate mosquitoes every time they bite me, i would welts all over, but i would never going to kill them off. you got to see the bigger picture. they should have done something about the parasites that hitch a free ride on these mosquitoes.
I despise mosquitoes with a passion.
I keep mosquito fish in tanks throughout my farm and they collect rainwater and eat mosquito eggs... This year however I am being inundated with mosquitoes probably because the 10 acres of forest surrounding my property we're just cleared for a new subdivision so there's probably standing water and everybody will die... Or if we survived then we're actually probably resistant to some of the things that other people are not resistant to because we were bitten by a mosquito
🤣🤣🤣🤣 looks like u haven't got malaria, ur comment will change after u get infected
My question is that "is everything that could annoy human or kill human have to go extinct? "
yes . includin u
@@Aerotyler23 well in that category weapons come first
Yes
@@JcoleMc i hope it was sarcasm !!! Not you being dead serious
To understand how doing something will affect things, we need to look for examples that already exist.
In all the examples you listed you only mentioned the release of agents, the cane toad, the instance of positive action that you would not think of harming anything but had major consequences for humans was the year of the sparrow in china.
We should rather than eradication of a species look towards a more benign conclusion of working out how to support a species to resist the disease and stop passing it on.
Other than stopping human suffering, a noble task, what would the eradication of malaria do to our total ecosystem. The one thing I can see is it would increase human population. But what other consequences would there be?
Hell no. We have no clue what it would unleash
I don't have a problem with nearly or completely wiping out the non-native mosquitoes in a given country.
The vast majority of mosquitoes I observe are Aedes sp., native to Asia and Africa. I think we can do without them in the United States.
some non native species integrate better then others well this is pure speculation but if you remove a species that replaced another you end up with a gap that may cause problems later on
I don't get it, how can an animal spread that gene if that gene causes it to become sterile? Can someone explain me
They already made this in singapore. I have a friend working in singapore but she said there still cases of malaria there
We need an inducible Gene Drive, meaning that by adding a specific compound to the environment of a highly affected region, the population there will be heavily impacted, but on the other hand the modification will not be active permanently. As soon as the malaria is under control the treatment can be stopped. By that means, the destruction of whole ecosystems on a long term can be prevented.
That would be inefficient, requiring the process to be used again. Wipe them all out in one go.
There are folks working on self-regulating and reversible gene drive systems. A while back DARPA (USA defense research agency) even funded a bunch of university research groups working on it.
It isn't that simple, but there are approaches which seem like they will work.
@@travcollier
In the meantime more people will die because the poor mosquitoes might become extinct.
@@jonatand2045 I'm well aware. I literally have friends and colleagues working on this stuff.
I'm actually a bit annoyed at Target Malaria and the Gates Foundation for basically taking up almost all the resources and insisting on their very cautious (lawyer led in many ways) approach.
Couldn't they modify the mosquitoes to produce some kind of immunity to Malaria? Say hijack their immune system to produce Malaria killing antibodies that also spreads through the population without wiping them out? While certainly far more challenging to actually do, it wouldn't disrupt the ecosystem only attack Malaria, which is the killer, not the mosquitoes
They are doing this in Singapore
Mosquitos are immune to the diseases they carry, that is why they aren't harmed, they only pass them onto other animals.
@@mildlydispleased3221 yes, but there may be away to make the mosquitoes kill the malaria inside of them so they stop spreading it
Yeah, it makes sense that Malaria is what needs to be targeted!
@@imienazwisko4219 yeah, its ongoing now on singapore
10:27 that music is insane...
Ty DW excellent
with all that I like to think that humans are a pest too. I mean, in the eyes of almost every species , definitely and even of many humans.
“I’d like to share a revelation that I’ve had, during my time here. It came to me when I tried to classify your species. I realized that you’re not actually mammals. Every mammal on this planet instinctively develops a natural equilibrium with the surrounding environment, but you humans do not. You move to an area and you multiply & multiply, until every natural resource is consumed. And the only way you can survive is to spread to another area. There is another organism on this planet that follows the same pattern. Do you know what it is? A virus. Human beings are a disease, a cancer of this planet, you are a plague. And we are the cure.” - Agent Smith, The Matrix
I have problem with the 'even of many humans' part of the argument because those that you're refering to usually do terrible things, hence using their point of view as valid is troublesome, at best.
@@techcafe0 I love the Matrix, but that quote breaks the inner logic. I mean, why didn't the machines destroy the humans? What enviroment was there to protect?
@@meyer6891 Nope, I contest - from a certain point of view. If a person sees e.g. a flock of pigeons in a city as a pest and this is considered okay, then it would be okay too to he saw humans as a pest.
@@jollyjokress3852 Yeah, I got that part and is and interesting point of view, but mentioning humans as a pest for humans is other thing that remits to xenophobe and racist ideologies, hence why I consider it innecesary to express the idea.
Probably the best method would be to have some anti-Malaria vaccine that wipes it out without interfering with the mosquitos DNA. But if we don't have that in the near future, this method might be needed.
As of last year we have a WHO approved malaria vaccine. But the question isn't about having a vaccine or not, the real test is weather or not wealthy nations will help out affected populations by providing them with access to these vaccines.
Imagine how mosquitos think we are their food source and meanwhile we silently plot to make them all unknowingly sterile...
Makes me wonder what cows have up their sleeves
lol🤣🤣 true! haha
we'll genetically catalog them, store their designs and bring them back later if notable repercussion begin to arise whats the major hold up?
The only good bug is a dead bug
It’s important to know that there are many variants of mosquitoes and most don’t bite. Also there are some variants that actually attack other mosquitoes. The issue is diseases and viruses they carry and that they are another organism that could in theory mutate bacteria to affect human lives in bad ways.
Looks like a beginning of a sci-fi movie
This can't be good for trout population
Wow humans are concered about animal extintion ...who are the main cause of their extintion.
You cant really talk about extinction if our population numbers are still increasing right?
Haven't they already been released in Florida, so we already have them in the wild, and can observe how it goes there?
Been here since this channel had 20k subs
Thanks for sticking around! Don't forget to subscribe ✨
We publish new videos every Friday 🙃
I am been there since 20 subconscious
I think putting modified mosquitoes in a microclimate( that includes flowers, trees, birds, reptiles & water source), basically that mimics their wild environment, & following their growth rate & impact on their environment could bring a better result, & valid if the same set-up is created for non- modified mosquitoes of same number, & following both at the same time
But they won't do that why would they. If plants were not able to reproduce and many other species were infected by the gene drive they could not profit from it.
Yeah because nothing has ever escaped and broken out of a lab...
@@stepheningermany Indeed. I do not remember such an event happening either.
I feel like gene editing could be better used in order to help various species SURVIVE the upcoming changes to their ecosystem which will come from Climate Change.
Maybe that way it’ll help with the biodiversity crisis that we’re facing.
Nah, thats
1) a longer route to a solution
2) the ethical implications of gene editing is just opening a horrible pandoras box
3) might cause more complications than solutions
Also, there are literally TOO many species in this world. And who are we as humans to enable them to survie or die.
Thats the equivalent of us picking one tribal nation and arming them but denying their neighboring tribal nation munitions.
What makes clan A better than Clan B.
And even if we did help them both.
Unless both species got assistance around the same time the time difference would cause one species to get a head start. And even if both species did, their mating seasons and gestation times to create each successive generation would render it pointless. Cuz some species breed year round and others are once a year and others are once every 3 years or even longer.
Idk in how many ways to say its both ethically wrong and even if was HYPOTHETICALLY done it wouldn't be cost effective.
So the simple answer is:
No, just no, for the love of God no.
Please No.
@@ericolens3 scientists already use gene editing to control mosquito populations
replace species with gene edited species would make the original species go extinct.
your vision is turning planet earth into a laboratory full of lab rats for rich people/nations to do what they want with
No, it won't. At most, it would disguise the problem. That would be modifying a bottleneck phenomenom in a way that the surviving population would be even less diverse.
Bravo D.W from PATNA, INDIA . FINE Documentary on MOSQUITO- MENACE 🌹
Currently in Bangladesh right now. The one thing I won't miss when I return to the UK is mosquitoes. Every morning in the last few weeks I get bitten like crazy.
Yes. I dont care if it will cause an imbalance in nature or f up the food cycle or whatever. we're all going to die anyway, might as well live a little less miserable without these things.
Selfish
@@tomdeaardappel8303 Bees are the real deal not prehistoric vampires
@@fandroid6491 They are all the real deal, even wasps. I love those little animals
The gene drive tech should also be scrutinized as like in any other tool this too could be abused.
It's hard to watch this video without feeling itchy.
Somehow losing half of our biodiversity because some mosquitoes disappeared would be totally worth it. We'd finally be able to go outside at night during summer months.
yes i hate mosquito bites
Should we kill all mosquitoes?
Me: yes
But that could severely impact the local ecosystem!
Me: the entire ecosystem will collapse, but that is a sacrifice I'm willing to make
+++
If the ecosystem falls it will kill you too genius and everyone else
Studies have shown that no animal eating mosquitoes eat them exclusively, or even have them as a major part of their diet. So as far we know, they are not important to ecosystems.
Selfish
Southern California has become uninhabitable because of mosquitoes. ☠️
yes and maybe but no. first, almost unlikely we are able especially in remote locations. 2nd, if contagious disease is eliminated in a certain location, would mosquito bites be fatal? 3rd, some people use/breed mosquitos for various reasons.
Could malaria develop ways to use other vectors if we get rid of the mosquitoes? Could there be horizontal transfer?
If they can, won't we already see it now?
@@boulderbash19700209 Not quite. Since there is no evolutionary pressure, as mosquitos already exist in the niche. Basically, mosquitos are such a good vector that mosquito-born malaria would out compete most others, and thus they never really evolve. Evolution doesn't trend towards optimal, it trends toward the bare minimum to propagate, which fluctuates depending on very many factors.
@@cortster12 So ... are there any horizontal transfer or not?
Oh......you right disease will looking another vactor to live
Wonder if we could genetically modify mosquitos' immune systems to be more robust, reducing the disease burden they bear and spread?
Agreed, if we can spread altered genes so effectively, shouldn't we try the approach that affects the ecosystem the least? Rather than banishing a whole species, just give them the ability to kill the viral loads. That way, the only victim is Zika, Malaria, and other viruses which we want to be extinct.
We must use this technology!
Anything that can eliminate the threat of the mosquitoes is a big bonus for everyone. One thing that was not mentioned in the article is the threat that mosquitoes pose to our pets, they carry Heart Worm that is deadly to dogs and I'm sure, but not positive that it infects other species too. I understand that there are other life forms that eat the blood suckers, but they eat other things too and I feel they would adapt to not having the pests in their diet. With the threat that they present to the human population, I don't understand the reluctance to get rid of them.
No we have done enough damage to this world already
Yes, there have been publications showing that mosquitoes are not the largest part of any known predator's diet, and that mosquitoes do not have a meaningful impact on any known ecosystem except the human one.
The tricky part is that we don't know a lot. Also, I'd like to see the sources of such big claims.
"No".
...-Hearing the mosquito bazz- "YES!!"
Why hasn’t this already been done
Don't play god to wipe out a species that have been created by god. You're not god
St fu
It could also lead to a mosquito species which is much more resistant and powerful. Nature always finds a way.
Tell that to the Dodo bird. Humans have made them and other species extinct very easily. It's kind of what we're good at, to be honest. The biting mosquitos are the ones that really need wiping out, and people are having a debate on it, while humans and other animal species are being decimated by them.
You don’t become resistant to gene drives
@@gothnate I think what people are saying is that mosquitos like other insects are so significant to their food webs that a sudden drop would lead to unimaginable ecological collapse ( which is already happening at an alarming rate)
Where do we draw the line? At things that don't bite us
It's absolutely worth the risk because the risk is almost non-existent.
I hate mosquitos but getting rid of them for good does not sound like a good idea. Because we cannot be sure about the possible consequences. What if we unleash a series of disasters?
History just keeps repeating itself, just look at the Communist Chinas Four Pests Campaign, it's not like causing a massive decline in indigenous species can cause a famine or two.
I don't know how I feel about this.
Human history has proven we absolutely suck at controlling the environment.
I'd prefer we find cheap malaria cures or symptom controlling because main problem is not everyone has first world level medical aid.
And most of the first world countries are located in temperate climates. diseases are more common in tropical parts of the world
Now they are less common in temperate climates, but only because we have eradicated smallpox, rabies, and the Black Death from our chunk of the world
@@arthurschildgen5522 That's totally wrong. Non of those transmit through mosquitoes. All those diseases you've mentioned in your comments were eradicated in most countries around the world. And the back death is not a disease LOL
I say yes, but then I know it’s going to bite us back one way or another
At least make them stop biting people, especially me.
While I applaud the work of the researcher to develop this breakthrough technology, I think weaponizing extinction is a step too far.
If we can insert genes that make mosquitos sterile, could we either vaccinate them against being able to carry the virus or conversely, be susceptible to the virus so that any infected mosquitos die off while uninfected individuals are allowed to survive?
This seems like a more elegant approach where we solve the problem directly rather than indirectly by targeting an entire species for extinction.
Yes it is more elegant. But would take much longer, (It is not a virus, it is a protozoan, Plasmodium) immunity research is much more complex than killing the mosquito.
Each year we delay the decision to kill the vector(s), hundreds of thousands die. What possible moral ground can justify that?
It's not a step too far. It's a step too back because we don't get to sing on a burning pyre of their remains.
As much as i hate mosquitoes, i dont think we should go around wiping out entire spieces that have survived for thousands to millions of years. Its kinda insane when you think about it for a moment.
Nobody cares , wipe them out
YES! It is insane. Humans always been using the environment for our own needs and so far we've gotten pretty good at destroying it. This could end malaria but it could also end so much more, which won't know until it's too late.
Yeah wipe them out, its not like I will live to suffer the consequences lmfao.
Keep up the good work trying to stabilize the ecosystem there my great great great grand offspring.
Isn’t it more about what country will sell its product first..
I'll end the world if it means no more mosquitoes
Easy solution:
Save the eggs of those mosquitoes that do not suck (human) blood. Release this modified mosquitos, let em kill off all mosquitos and then when this ones will die off. Release the old mosquitoes from the eggs that was saved before.
That way, u get rid of (Human) blood sucking mosquitoes and keep the none (human) blood sucking mosquitoes.
EZPZ
Because unforeseen consequences have never stopped anyone before lmao
@@arthurschildgen5522 Killing off Mosquitos for a year and then repopulating with mosquitos that dont' suck human blood is nothing big. we can live with it.
@@vax_gax_lax_bax_max_vax2578 how can we know for sure that this is "nothing big" - killing off a native species and intentionally replacing it with an invasive one
@@arthurschildgen5522 What do mosquitos do, what benefit do they bring?
It's not worth the risks. Let us allow both the natural and human world thrive by living in Harmony with Nature.
As someone who grew up in Southeast Asia, exterminating all mosquitoes would be for the greater good of the entire world.
This is a risk we are all willing to take.
If it's about wiping out the entire species of mosquitos, I'd say no. But from my understanding, the purpose of this gene editing + gene drive research is to be used on certain species of mosquitos that cause harm more than good to us humans, i.e. the problematic one: Aedes aegypti.
graphic violence alert 00:44
squash
Annihilating the root cause of so much suffering in the developing world, is worth any price paid. Saving human lives must come first.
Oh hellllll nooooo!! Seriously! Just because it can be done doesn’t mean it should be.
Many water ecosystems and their species rely heavily on mosquito larva for their food source. The dragon fly, for example, feed primarily on mosquito larva, In fact dragonflies are a biological control for mosquito populations. if you remove the adult mosquitos then you remove that food source and heavily impact dragonfly populations, as well as the many birds that feed on dragonflies.
By the way, non bloodsucking mosquitoes exist. We're only eliminating the bloodsucking ones. 3499 species of mosquitoes can still be eaten by dragonflies.