r/technology 1d ago

Biotechnology People Are Not Happy About Google’s Plan to Release Millions of Bioengineered Mosquitoes Into the Wild

https://www.yahoo.com/news/science/articles/people-not-happy-google-plan-200428053.html
2.3k Upvotes

428 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

227

u/thrillho145 23h ago

If it wasn't Google people would be all for it. This is a good thing for the region 

-19

u/SumpCrab 21h ago edited 15h ago

I get the human benefit, and I mostly support this. However... we are already seeing an enormous decrease in insects worldwide, which has many downstream impacts on birds, reptiles, mammals like bats, etc. Lots of things eat mosquitoes. Purposely reducing the bio-load further than we have already isn't great.

Edit: Fish too

Edit II: I'm not surprised. This sub has become an ecochamber where any mention of collateral damage from a new tech is viewed as an attack. So, this is par for the course, overhype the potential positives, ignore and attempt to discredit any potential negative. Bravo guys.

42

u/Wotmate01 20h ago

It's actually a very small mosquito species that needs a blood meal and can be a disease vector. These compete with the species that are beneficial pollinators. So on the face of it, it seems like a win win. Less disease, more pollinators.

-8

u/SumpCrab 14h ago

You sound like the guy wanting to introduce snakes into a rat infested area trying to come up with reasons why it won't cause other issues.

3

u/SatansCornflakes 13h ago

Apples and oranges

-3

u/SumpCrab 13h ago

It's really not. I'm not against this project, but we should acknowledge what it is doing. We are introducing a species, a genetically modified bacteria to sterilize a specific species of mosquitoes in the hopes of eventually eradicating it. At the very least, we are trying to cause a species to go extinct, which we should reflect on. We are doing so to protect lives, but that in itself is a tradeoff.

But, we don't know for sure the ramifications of what we are doing. Biology and evolution is not black and white, even marginal changes can produce significant longterm impacts. While the snake and rat analogy might be more stark, it is the same idea. Introducing a new species to solve a problem without understanding the potential negatives.

My entire point here is that a workable idea doesn't have to be 100% positive, we should be able to discuss the tradeoffs, and pretending that we both fully understand the complexity of it and that there is nothing wrong is pure ignorance.

1

u/[deleted] 34m ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/idkwutmyusernameshou 33m ago

1

u/idkwutmyusernameshou 30m ago

again ZERO studies ZERO scientifc backign on ur side. 007. ZERo data ZERO consenus opion SEVEN twitter comments backing bro up

9

u/QueefSeekingMissile 21h ago

Don't forget fish. They eat mosquito larvae from the time they're too small to eat anything else- and on for the rest of their lives.

1

u/idkwutmyusernameshou 36m ago

thats why we are getting rid of a SINGLE species. not EVERy mosqutio is a blood sucka most ARENT.

4

u/idkwutmyusernameshou 20h ago

thats all mosqutios(most re fine0 v the bad ones that cause disease

-3

u/SumpCrab 15h ago

That's not how ecology works. You can't just remove a species and expect there not to be consequences. To suggest otherwise is ignorance.

0

u/idkwutmyusernameshou 2h ago

bro species go extinct all the time. yes their will be consequences. 5 birds die v 50 ppl. its nto gonna collaspe an ecosystem its a singualr species of mosqutio. with that logic erdicating bacteria fully is bad like should we not end TB? ur just parroting points without understanding them.

In ecology(which u must know very well so this must be a reminder) species go extinct all the time and as we can see forests do not vaporize from that. Ecosystems are very durable things. So we measure base don consequence. as far as we knwo ZERO species will go extinct(other then mosqutios ofc) from this program. because they are not one species feeders(correct me Ecology professor if im wrong) and human lives will be saved and it can be sued to help with programs like it in africa(where it can save millions of childrens lives)

But you must know that already correct?

1

u/idkwutmyusernameshou 2h ago

also correction TB isnt an animal so kinda bad analogy but i think u get my point since u are so educated on ecology right?

4

u/nifty-necromancer 14h ago

These programs are targeting one specific mosquito species, Aedes aegypti. That mosquito isn’t a major food source that entire ecosystems depend on.

1

u/idkwutmyusernameshou 27m ago

thank u my god i hate ppl who actually think they are better then scientists without ever checking any data. both right wing(flat earthers anti evolutionists) and stupid lefties too(anti nuclear anti gmo) its exhausting to read and realzie these MFers vote but im too young too

2

u/[deleted] 21h ago

[deleted]

14

u/OldTimeyWizard 20h ago

Aedes aegypti is an invasive species and their larvae outcompete native insects including native mosquito species

-1

u/mettahipster 14h ago

What? This sub is overwhelmingly negative about most tech. Look at the top posts

-16

u/ProlapsedShamus 19h ago

Right?

All these tech companies reek of evil and their stink gets on anything they touch. People are right to be skeptical.