• Tlaloc_Temporal@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    The whole point is that DDT caused a mosquito crash and nothing bad happened. If we can crash mosquitoes without DDT, it would be better for everyone.

    • Ma10gan@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      I wouldn’t say that nothing bad happened. America – particularly urban areas where anti-mosquito measures have been implemented – has been dealing with declines of important populations of birds and insects, and we don’t fully understand the exact causes. Which is to say, we don’t know what role mosquito population reduction has played in this. We have vaccines against mosquito-borne illnesseses, which I believe are preferable to eradicating a species and the potentially devastating consequences we could encounter.

      • Tlaloc_Temporal@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        I would argue that habitat destruction, the introduction of hypercarivores, and chemical spraying would have a much larger effect on bird and insect populations around urban areas than a reduction in mosquitoes, but I’ll admit that I haven’t done any research (primary or secondary) on the topic.

        My point was that a genetic attack vector would have far less side-effects than DDT, and pointing out the flaws of DDT does nothing to criticize attacking mosquitoes genetically.