abmoraz: This same company has been using this same technology to combat mosquitoes and Dengue Fever. The BBC2 show "Dara O'Briain's Science Club" had a real good expose on how it works. Basically, the insects (mosquitoes, or in this case, moths) die in the larval stage unless they are fed a specific chemical that suppresses the gene. This gene suppressant is not found anywhere in the wild. This allows them breed the insects with the built in kill-switch in a lab, but as soon as they release them, they die off.They have seen upwards of an 80% reduction in mosquito population in the areas they have used the mosquitoes, so I have some faith that it may work here as well. My only concern is that insects are at the bottom of the good chain for a lot of animals. Reducing their numbers could have a negative reaction farther up the chain, but that is just my gut reaction, not based in fact.
Vlad_the_Inaner: The image of science has been invoked. We all should all trust things we are told are scientific, all the time. Nobody would ever try to use science to mislead people when money was on the line.
mgshamster: Vlad_the_Inaner: Fano: I feel like the "tell" was the use of the word toxic.Because a chemical product with a name ending "-icide" is rarely toxic?You must be an awesome poker player.Nuances required:1) Toxic to which species?2) What dose is toxic?3) What is the route of exposure?3) What is the physiological pathway for toxicity?4) How does the chemical decompose?/Everything is toxic; it all depends on the dose and the route of administration.
Fano: I feel like the "tell" was the use of the word toxic.
mgshamster: modern bananas (which was developed via cross breeding);
ruta: Advertisers are not scientists
abmoraz: This gene suppressant is not found anywhere in the wild.
gmpilot: Oh my god the comments on the article are so stupid. I try to keep optimistic, but are western education systems really this awful?
ThatDarkFellow: I say good on them. Look how well the whole killer bee thing played out./spiders next?
mgshamster: gmpilot: Oh my god the comments on the article are so stupid. I try to keep optimistic, but are western education systems really this awful? 90% of the fears towards any form of GM have zero basis in any science, any incident, or any situation that has ever arisen. Worst part is, no matter how many well documented and peer-reviewed papers get published every year, nobody complaining is ever going to read a single one. Sometimes I wonder why my fellow scientists often seem so absorbed in their own work and tire of trying to explain it to strangers; then I see abhorrent disingenuous detritus like this. If you are legitimately concerned by GM products, there are legitimate ways to find out many of the facts. Reading crappy articles like this is not one of them.The naturalistic fallacy has really dug its heels deep into American culture, unfortunately.
If you like these links, you'll love
Total accessTotal knowledgeTotal Fark
Sign up for the Fark NotNewsletter!
Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.
When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.
Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.
You need to create an account to submit links or post comments.
Click here to submit a link.
Also on Fark
Submit a Link »
Copyright © 1999 - 2017 Fark, Inc | Last updated: Dec 18 2017 04:41:50
Runtime: 0.361 sec (361 ms)