By Dr. Mercola
As noted in a recent article by The Atlantic,1
history is rife with pest control experiments gone terribly wrong.
Today the stakes are higher than ever, as scientists are increasingly
turning to genetic engineering to affect environmental change.
Earlier this year, the Zika virus, which is carried by the Aedes aegypti mosquito, was declared a worldwide public health threat.2,3
Besides calling for increased use of chemical sprays against
mosquitoes, focus quickly turned to the idea of releasing genetically
engineered (GE) mosquitoes to control populations.
The male transgenic mosquitoes, which are released to mate with females
in the wild, carry a "suicide" or "self-destruct gene" that gets
transferred to the offspring, killing them before they reach breeding
maturity.4
To achieve this, protein fragments from the herpes virus, E. coli
bacteria, coral and cabbage looper moth were inserted into the insects.
Biotech company Oxitec refers to their GE mosquitoes as a
"non-chemical insecticide," and these controversial creatures are now
another step closer to being released on U.S. soil.
Florida Keys Community Is Latest Testing Ground for Transgenic Mosquito
Meetings for Key Haven residents have already been held to discuss Oxitec's proposed GE mosquito trial in the area.5
In early March, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) released a draft of its environmental impact study6
of the GE mosquito, declaring it will have "no significant impact" on
the health of residents or the environment in this Florida Keys'
community.7
As noted by CNN, Zika wasn't the original reason Oxitec's transgenic mosquitoes were considered.
The Aedes aegypti mosquito also carries the dengue, yellow fever and
chikungunya virus, and outbreaks of dengue fever in the Florida Keys in
2009 and 2010 prompted local mosquito control officials to look for
more effective options to control the non-native insect.
According to Oxitec, field tests in Piracicaba, Brazil, led to an 82
percent decline to the mosquito population over an eight-month period.8 In the Cayman Islands, 96 percent of native mosquitoes were suppressed in a 2010 field trial.
The Cayman Islands recently approved full deployment of the Oxitec
mosquito, starting in June, with weekly releases of hundreds of
thousands of mosquitoes scheduled to continue for at least nine months.9
However, while the FDA has given the transgenic mosquito the thumbs up,
Key Haven residents are not particularly keen on being guinea pigs.
Especially since neither dengue, Zika, or any of the other diseases
spread by Aedes aegypti pose a threat to health in the Florida Keys.10 Mila de Mier, who lives in the small community of Key Haven, told CNN:11
"Less than a mile from the release site is a senior center and a
local school. That area was not one that was affected by dengue. Not a
single case ever. So why does the FDA want to do an experiment here when
they can do this all over the world? ...
There has been no acceptance from community members. If the local
and federal government fail to protect us and our wishes, our last
option will be to trust the judicial system and bring it to the court. A
legal battle is an option at this point."
What Could Go Wrong?
While decimating Aedes aegypti populations may sound like a good
solution to eliminate transmission of disease, there's always the
potential for unforeseen side effects.
A 2011 article in The New York Times12
brought up a number of concerns, including the possibility that these
genes might infect human blood, not through insect bites, but by
finding entry through skin lesions or inhalation.
According to the Institute of Science in Society,13 such transmission could potentially create "insertion mutations" and other unpredictable types of DNA damage in the host.
Alfred Handler, Ph.D., a geneticist at the Agriculture Department in
Hawaii has also pointed out that mosquitoes can develop resistance to
the lethal gene. If such mosquitoes were to be released, the resistance
could spread to the offspring.
According to Todd Shelly, an entomologist for the Agriculture
Department in Hawaii, 3.5 percent of the insects in a laboratory test
actually survived to adulthood, despite carrying the lethal gene.14
Another factor that could make the GE mosquito backfire is the fact
that Oxitec's mosquitoes were designed to die in the absence of
tetracycline (which is introduced in the lab in order to keep them
alive long enough to breed).
However, tetracycline and other antibiotics are showing up in the
environment, in soil and surface water samples. The mosquitoes were
designed with the assumption they would NOT encounter tetracycline in
the wild. With tetracycline exposure (for example, in a lake) these
insects could potentially thrive.
Last but not least, by employing so-called gene drive technology (which
ensures that all offspring end up with the GE gene), concerns arise
over the impact on biodiversity and the ecosystem as a whole.
Some argue that the extinction of the Aedes aegypti would hardly result
in ecosystem collapse, and this may well be true. However, the Aedes
aegypti is certainly not the only insect being genetically altered and
released into the wild.
The larger problem lies in the fact that population scale ecosystem
engineering is taking place without proper regulatory oversight,
transparency, or public discussion. Decades' old regulations are being
relied on for these novel technologies, and they are sorely inadequate
for the task.
GE Diamondback Moths Being Field Tested
For example, Oxitec is also currently field testing a GE version of the diamondback moth,15
a known agricultural pest. The diamondback moth was the first crop
pest to become resistant to DDT, and they're rapidly developing
resistance to other chemical pesticides as well, which is why Oxitec began working on a GE version of the moth.
It's similar to their GE mosquitoes in that they pass on a genetic
trait that kills the offspring before reaching maturity. Eventually, the
entire species will die out from lack of reproduction.
The GE moths have already been laboratory tested in the U.K. and
"caged" field trials took place the summer of 2015 in New York. Open
field trials may take place as early as this summer. Many have opposed
the field trials, including GeneWatch UK, the Center for Food Safety,
Friends of the Earth, Food and Water Watch, and the Northeast Organic
Farming Association of New York. According to The Washington Post:16
"We're worried about what the effects of these trials outside of
the cages [will be],' said Liana Hoodes, policy adviser at the
Northeast Farming Association of New York (NOFA-NY), citing concerns
that the GE moths could spread beyond their trial sites and begin
appearing on private growers' farms.
Hoodes said NOFA-NY would like to see an impact analysis on the
possible effects of GE moths on non-target species — that is, organisms
besides diamondback moths — in case they happen to be eaten by birds
or other animals or even accidentally consumed by humans."
GE Bollworm Moths and Fruit Flies
Oxitec is also the creator of GE pink bollworm moths, which have
already been unleashed over the fields of Arizona in an effort to
overtake natural bollworm populations, as well as GE fruit flies. These
also contain genes that prevent the species from reproducing. In
Australia, where the Mediterranean fruit fly is one of the most common
pest species, the Department of Agriculture and Food plans to conduct an
indoor trial assessment on the use of GE fruit flies as a means of
pest control.
So we're seeing this creeping trend where pests of all kinds are being
addressed by altering and eradicating the entire species. Subsequently,
you cannot limit the conversation to any one species of insects. The
question is, is it wise to eradicate pests by using gene drive
technology that more or less assures extinction of the entire species?
Just how many pests can safely be vanished before the ecosystem is
altered in some devastating way? There are all sorts of questions that
are currently not being addressed in any comprehensive way.
Australia to Address Invasive Carp Problem With Herpes Virus
In related news, southeastern Australia is also planning to address the
problem of overpopulation of invasive carp by unleashing the herpes
virus on the fish. According to Newsweek:17
"[C]arp are a huge problem in Australia. They were first introduced
to fish farms in the country in the 1850s, but escaped en masse into
the wild in the 1960s, and their populations have exploded ever since
... The virus they plan on using is specific to carp, and
kills up to 80 percent of the animals ... It attacks their skin,
kidneys and gills ... killing them in a little over a week ...
[T]he virus appeared in carp farms in Southeast Asia in the 1990s,
and hasn't been shown to harm farmers and other people there ... While the plan may sound a bit dodgy at first, research has shown that the carp herpesvirus (cyprinid herpesvirus 318) doesn't harm native fish species, eels, frogs, turtles, chickens, mice or water dragons (a type of lizard) ..."
The irony here is that if it wasn't for fish farms, they wouldn't have
this invasive species problem in the first place. Yet today, when
concerns are brought forth about the dangers of GE fish escaping from
farms and decimating the ecosystem, proponents insist that escapes would
be "impossible."
Aerial Application of Mosquito Killer Linked to Higher Rates of Autism
Up to this point, the warfare against pests has involved chemicals, and
this too has been shown to have devastating side effects. According to
recent research,19
higher rates of autism are found in areas exposed to annual aerial
spraying of pyrethroids, a type of larvicide that kills mosquitoes,
compared to areas where mosquito control is done primarily through
pellets distributed on the ground.
"The authors report that kids living in zip codes where the
spraying was done each summer had around a 25 percent higher risk of an
autism diagnosis or developmental problem compared to kids living in
areas without the aerial spraying," Time Magazine20 writes.
According to Dr. Steve Hicks, assistant professor of pediatrics at Penn
State College of Medicine:"Several studies have previously reported
links between pesticide and autism risk. Our data suggests the way in
which pesticides are applied might play some role."
Previous research has found that pregnant women who are exposed to pyrethroids
in their third trimester are more likely to give birth to autistic
children, and animal studies suggest it causes neurological, immune, and
reproductive damage. Some pyrethroids also act as endocrine disruptors
by mimicking estrogen. Such hormone-disrupting chemicals can raise
your levels of estrogen, thereby promoting the growth of
estrogen-sensitive cancers such as breast cancer.
Besides the occasional aerial disbursement by your local mosquito
control, there are more than 3,500 commercial products containing this
insecticide. This includes items like roach sprays, flea bombs, and dog
flea or tick collars and medicated shampoos. (Compounds that end in
"thrin," such as bifenthrin, permethrin and cypermethrin, are all
pyrethroids.)
Biological Warfare Endangers Everyone, Everywhere
All of this begs the question, are we doing the right thing by waging
war against pests with toxic chemicals and genetically engineered
insects? It needs to be understood that there's a price to pay, and
increasingly, that price is human and environmental health. We're
poisoning our world, and ourselves, in the name of protecting the environment and public health. There's something inherently wrong with that position.
Some are quick to say we have no other options. But this isn't
necessarily true. What's lacking is the political and societal will to
make the necessary changes, which involve decimating the chemical
industry and fully embracing ecologically sound regenerative methods of agriculture. When nature is in balance, pests fail to gain the upper hand. They still exist, but they're kept in check naturally.
Once the soil microbial population is rebuilt, everything else falls
into place much easier. Not only are the plants significantly healthier
and more nutrient dense, they're also more resistant to plant diseases
and pests. Certain plants, such as marigolds, can also work as pest
repellents by giving off a fragrance that bugs do not like.
It may not be as effective as releasing a GE insect designed to
decimate the entire species, or a potent toxin, but if we keep going
the way we're headed, we're just going to encounter more of the same
problems. I have no immediate answers to these dilemmas, but I believe
we must begin a more open discussion about what we're doing, and what
the options are. We also need to implement more farsighted solutions
rather than thinking mere weeks or months ahead. Our children's futures
depend on these decisions.
Spread the Word to
Friends And Family
By Sharing this Article.
Email
No comments:
Post a Comment