If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Yahoo)   Today's fearmongering media article brought to you by Yahoo: U.S. to become decimated thanks to gene-engineered, hard-to-kill insects   (news.yahoo.com) divider line 110
    More: Scary  
•       •       •

13159 clicks; posted to Main » on 22 Sep 2004 at 12:19 AM (9 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



110 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2004-09-22 01:07:52 AM
This reminds me. It's fall, and it won't be long before those cute little imported ladybugs start their annual pilgrimage. Here in south central Missouri, they invade via any crack, while looking for a place to winter over.

Doesn't sound all that bad, but there seems to be thousands of the damned things, and they can make you a little testy. Rarely see them in the summer?
 
2004-09-22 01:10:36 AM
"This reminds me of the Stephen King story, "The Mist". Anyone read it? It is extremely cool and spooked the hell out of me when I was a lad." WombatJoe

One of my favorites.

Any who, wiping out malaria would be great for the 3rd world; however, science's escapades in mucking w/ an ecosystem often have unintended consequences. See kudzu in the SE. Hope they think this through.
 
2004-09-22 01:11:19 AM
I had no problem shooting those big black bumblebees with my Red Ryder BB gun. Tennis and badminton rackets work pretty good also.
 
2004-09-22 01:12:53 AM
MC Pee Pants denied any allegations of complicity in the matter.

Like I've mentioned in previous 'insect-threads': THE HELLSTROM CHRONICLES!
UGGHHHHH!!!
NOOOOOOO!!!

Ben From Canada: YEAH! Right on, bro!
 
2004-09-22 01:15:20 AM
Anyone remember the Sim game where you get to be a mosquito? Playing that game made me seriously consider going to law school.
 
2004-09-22 01:16:05 AM
wiping out malaria would be great for the 3rd world; however, science's escapades in mucking w/ an ecosystem often have unintended consequences.

So you'd rather just condemn millions of people a year to die a horrible death rather than take some simple steps to eliminate malaria?

You green blooded, inhuman, vulcan son of a....

Sorry, wrong thread.

A small amount of DDT spraying would handily solve the mosquito problem in the third world and cause NO amount of ecological damage AT ALL. Of course, Greenpeace would have a fit. They'd rather the bodies were stacked 12 feet high than admit they were wrong on DDT.

farkin' eco-nuts.
 
2004-09-22 01:17:43 AM
What about the eagles? Won't somebody think of the eagles?!
 
2004-09-22 01:20:00 AM
Weaver95
A small amount of DDT spraying would handily solve the mosquito problem in the third world and cause NO amount of ecological damage AT ALL.

Pretty bold claim there. Are you sure there would be no ecological damage? How about the fish that eat the mosquito larvae? What about the animals in the ecosystem that eat mosquitos? And the animals that eat those animals? And so on, and so on...

BillSPreston is right. Unintended consequences can be a biatch.
 
2004-09-22 01:21:34 AM
DirtyDeadGhostofEbenezerCooke:

"WTF?!"
- Don Henley
 
2004-09-22 01:21:49 AM
Didn't they try something like this in the 50's? I think they are called "killer bees."
 
2004-09-22 01:21:54 AM
How about we get to the root of the problem an kill all mosquitoes? While we're at it, kill the ticks and fireants also. And wasps, I hate those bastards!
 
2004-09-22 01:25:31 AM


This one bent my Wookie.
 
2004-09-22 01:26:50 AM
Weaver95

As far as whether DDT is harmful, try a completely unbiased, objective source instead of the nonsense at junkscience that you used to support your position.

Read it and see for yourself. It's not as bad as some would have you believe, but it is definitely not something that you want in the environment. It's persistent, it bioaccumulates, and it's toxic. Those are three ingredients for bad news.

Interestingly, because DDT bioaccumulates, it poses a threat to humans, and isn't just some "eco-nut" concern. The funniest part about this is that the most cost-effective solution to malaria in third-world countries isn't DDT anyway, it's insecticide-treated mosquito nets (by about $0.33 per case of malaria prevented - $1.54 v. $1.87), which don't have the negative impacts on the environment and human health.
 
2004-09-22 01:26:51 AM
donald pleasance fetishist DDT was blamed for the near extinction of bald eagles through exposure causing eggshells to get too thin. The fact is, I just hate farking birds; there's never been an eagle yet that wouldn't peck out your eyes and eat your liver given half a chance. Thin those shells and kill the skeeters.
 
2004-09-22 01:35:47 AM
 
2004-09-22 01:39:55 AM
Weaver95
A small amount of DDT spraying would handily solve the mosquito problem in the third world and cause NO amount of ecological damage AT ALL. Of course, Greenpeace would have a fit. They'd rather the bodies were stacked 12 feet high than admit they were wrong on DDT.

Are you high? DDT is dangerous to both the eco-system and humans. It also bio-magnifies.

That is why it is illegal to USE in the United States, but fine to MAKE it here and SELL IT elsewhere.
 
2004-09-22 01:39:57 AM
So you'd rather just condemn millions of people a year to die a horrible death rather than take some simple steps to eliminate malaria?

You green blooded, inhuman, vulcan son of a....
-Weaver 95

What if the new mosquitos end up being great hosts for yellow or dengue fever or a disease not currently carried by mosquitoes? That's what I was thinking.

Live long and prosper.
 
2004-09-22 01:41:19 AM
Your dog wants RAID.
 
2004-09-22 01:50:26 AM
DeadGhostofEbenezerCooke: I believe you should be directing your concern to that coke-addled wank poor man's Levon Helm.

Could it be that obscure?
 
2004-09-22 01:53:29 AM
Atvar
Time to move to the moon.


An excellent point.
By any standards, we should already have giant domed moon colonies at this late date. Hell, even in the 1970s, when I was a kid, we expected a full "Space 1999" colonization.

They say it's hard to find good modern sci-fi because it's all been done already, but I for one have to go back to the old school and demand my condo on a domed moon colony, and some excellent space vacations.

Sheesh, we don't even have anti-grav cars or food-pills yet. The creators of the Jetsons would be embarrassed.
 
2004-09-22 01:55:38 AM
I trust that all the fans of bio-industry goodness will NOT be filing any lawsuits when all that delicious insecticide, which resides in a local field/river near you, finds its way up the food chain into your body and makes you puke and your children a tad less in touch with the world through exposure during their early development.
 
2004-09-22 01:59:15 AM
Speaking of fearmongering, did anyone else see that Cat Stevens' plane was diverted from landing in DC because Cat Stevens is now considered to be a threat to national security?

Maybe he had genetically modified ladybugs in his shoes.
 
2004-09-22 02:01:18 AM
Weaver95 et al.:

Last I checked, DDT still was being used in the third world, where it is
needed. It is not needed in the US.

Yes, halogenated organic compounds are spooky but they include most
pesticides (nicotene being one exception.) So we should just try to use
less persistent ones if we can.
 
2004-09-22 02:06:36 AM
Wow. You better know your DDT before you start spouting off about it here on Fark. Must be some link to Fark on the DDT homepage or something.
 
2004-09-22 02:09:35 AM
moran

It is still used in the third world, but I think Weaver95's point is based on the fact that its use is heavily discouraged by most aid organizations, which really limits the scope of its use.

You raise a good point about it not being needed in the U.S., because it still can be used here if the EPA grants a waiver, which it has done only once or twice for emergency situations.
 
2004-09-22 02:11:14 AM
DDT, it turned out, affected a range of animals and drove some bird species to near-extinction by weakening their eggshells.

I can't believe Rachel Carson's lies are still being forwarded by gullible idiots. Then again, expect nothing from so-called modern "journalists."

WW2 Soldiers doused themselves with DDT to kill body lice. You can even eat a small amount of it and be just fine.
The poisons that replaced DDT were highly toxic; if you got one drop on your skin you'd die.

As far as DDT goes, "greens" are guilty of African genocide.

Real world = real consequences.
 
2004-09-22 02:15:45 AM
Dear Sir Chevron Food Mart,

Please read the thread before posting. You've contributed nothing new, and your points have already been addressed by more stable minds.

Thank you.
 
2004-09-22 02:20:14 AM
Sir Chevron Food Mart

I guess these guys are gullible idiots compared to your amazing scientific intellect?

From the EPA webpage:
What is DDT?
Prior to 1972 when its use was banned, DDT was a commonly used pesticide. Although it is no longer used or produced in the United States, we continue to find DDT in our environment. Other parts of the world continue to use DDT in agricultural practices and in disease-control programs. Therefore, atmospheric deposition is the current source of new DDT contamination in our Great Lakes. DDT, and its break-down products DDE and DDD, are persistent, bioacculumative, and toxic (PBT) pollutants target by EPA.

Why Are We Concerned About DDT?
Even though DDT has been banned since 1972, it can take more than 15 years to break down in our environment. Fish consumption advisories are in effect for DDT in many waterways including the Great Lakes ecosystem.

What harmful effects can DDT have on us?
Probable human carcinogen
Damages the liver
Temporarily damages the nervous system
Reduces reproductive success
Can cause liver cancer
Damages reproductive system
How are we exposed to DDT?
By eating contaminated fish and shellfish
Infants may be exposed through breast milk
By eating imported food directly exposed to DDT
By eating crops grown in contaminated soil
Where can DDT be found?
Potential Sources to our Environment:

DDT in soil can be absorbed by some growing plants and by the animals or people who eat those plants
DDT in water is absorbed by fish and shellfish in those waterways
Atmospheric deposition
Soil and sediment runoff
Improper use and disposal
 
2004-09-22 02:22:53 AM
Also, as for the "if you get one drop on your skin, you'll die" claim, very
few compounds meet this standard, and they would be used as chemical
weapons, not insecticides.
 
2004-09-22 02:32:49 AM
You can even eat a small amount of it and be just fine.-
Sir Chevron Food Mart

If you start eating DDT to prove your point, please video tape it. It would be a great victory for Social Darwinists.
 
2004-09-22 02:39:55 AM
Chevron's momma musta drank DDT by the gallon.
Whatta tard.
 
2004-09-22 03:03:36 AM
Ok, so they engineer 'skeeters that can't carry malaria. Hopefully they check real well that they haven't been altered to the point where they can carry other blood borne pathogens like - dengue, yellow fever, ebola or other hemoragic fevers, HIV, etc...

Hope they get it right.
 
2004-09-22 03:07:53 AM
dancing bear

Those are Asian ladybeetles, they come from the soy fields. In Illinois, it is estimated that there is at least one beetle for every soybean plant in the state. And very soon every farking one of 'em is going to head over to my apartment and find a way in. They bite, and when they're smashed, they release a foul-smelling fluid. Needless to say, I can't wait.
 
2004-09-22 03:24:23 AM
At least it isn't giant texans.



/not photoshopped
 
2004-09-22 03:27:23 AM
And these insects will attack if you vote for Kerry.
-Dick Cheney
 
2004-09-22 03:28:08 AM
natural-selection-at-work
I just got an AK-47. Let me know if you need help taking care of those little buggers.
 
2004-09-22 03:29:22 AM
 
2004-09-22 03:51:57 AM
That's it! Stop the ride. I want to get off.

The whole "circle" of life thing is just so much wasted air on scientists for some reason.

Even "killer" germs like Malaria have their place. It's called "thinnin' the herd." Not everyone is meant to live forever. Sorry kids. It's the truth.

I'll be ducking on my way out the door so feel free to bring the flames. I live in a cold region and need the extra heat.

Out.
 
2004-09-22 04:11:39 AM
EPA is not an unbiased agency. DDT is cheap to make now, thus corporations have no interest in it... thus, the bannination allows more expensive alternatives to be sold/used instead. EPA helps out the corporations by keeping DDT on the scary list.

And I still don't get the irrational fear of "Frankenfood", "Frankenskeeter", "Al Franken", whatever. Many of the same nuts who are pro-Stem Cell tinkering are against Genetic tinkering? OMFG, that blows the mind.

Lastly, there is NO unbiased source in human society. There is no perfect vacuum, and any scientist who claims to be completely free from observer error is a practicing liar, imo. Yeah, you use statistics to "free" yourself from observer error... but don't make me quote Mark Twain.

/grumpy. now to go back to sleep after that stupid earthquake woke me up.
 
2004-09-22 04:39:38 AM
Twizzler
I am sure you would feel that way if you lived in a malaria infested area. Ever taken an antibotic or get vaccinated when you were a growing up?
 
2004-09-22 05:40:18 AM
"We need to identify the next level in this whole adventure."
This type of talk really instills me with confidence in the program? Would you like to participate in the next level of this adventure?
 
2004-09-22 07:27:32 AM
This is probably the most informative thread I've seen on DDT. Kudos to the bio/chemo-nerds (armchair or professional) on the forum. (Hell of a lot better than a Bush/Kerry flamewar.)
 
2004-09-22 08:42:39 AM
Aren't there enough things out there that bite us already? Need we customize our own bitey bugs?

Twizzler
Even "killer" germs like Malaria have their place. It's called "thinnin' the herd." Not everyone is meant to live forever. Sorry kids. It's the truth.

I am a biologist, and I get flamed for that opinion all the time.

/slowly backs out of the thread...
 
2004-09-22 08:58:49 AM
I for one welcome our new indestructable insect overlo...

Oh, screw it. Roach, come over here and meet my good friend Mr. Addidas.
 
2004-09-22 09:12:15 AM
Nice_Shoes_Wanna_Fock
I just woke up. Now that I'm full of coffee and I'm a little more alert, I see what you were doing (sheepish grin).
I get a bit defensive now and then. I actuallly take a lot of flack and it makes me kinda jumpy at times.
/biologist
/integrated pest management
 
2004-09-22 09:19:47 AM
When will people realize that Yahoo doesn't write content? It was Reuters you moron!
 
2004-09-22 09:55:51 AM
nkonichiwa
Aren't there enough things out there that bite us already? Need we customize our own bitey bugs?

Did you RTFA? They arent adding another species to the list they are modding the mosquito (Anopheles gambiae) so it CAN NOT transmit malaria.

I am a biologist

Then you should know that if they did make a "new mosquito" it would be pointless unless it out competed the transmiter of malaria (unlikely). I am guessing they want to introduce a "no malaria gene" and hope it gets passed around the population.

Good luck to them, I would say that the odds are against it happening.
 
2004-09-22 10:46:31 AM
Maybe it's just me, and something I just don't get..

If they're going to go to all this trouble anyhow, why don't they just kill two birds with one stone, and instead "genetically engineer" them to no longer be immune to the germ they carry?

Bug bites someone with virus, bug gets germ, bug dies a few hours later.

End of both problems.
 
2004-09-22 11:40:27 AM
Mordaris

The idea is for the gene to get passed around the mosquito population. That is not likely to happen if the mosquito dies soon after it gets the disease. The best way to do this is what the scientists are doing; namely, make a bunch of mosquitos that can survive malaria but not transmit it, and hope that through luck and natural selection, the new mosquitos take over the population.

lost-password

No problem. When I worked in biotech I took a lot of flack also...people are scared when you tell them you investigate drug candidates for a living for some reason (even when you tell them it all happens in a test tube). I feel you.
 
2004-09-22 12:04:25 PM
Hmm, "The Beginning of the End." I saw that on MST3K once.

As for a Simpsons reference, I got nothin' except "There will be mayhem with the giants and the eatingoftreesFLAVEN!"

/nothin'...see?
 
Displayed 50 of 110 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report