Hacker News Reader

Comment by ff-- | Hacker News Reader

Malaria used to be common in the US until the 1950s or so. It was eradicated through extensive mosquito control and engineering efforts. Rich countries can cope; it's the developing world that's thoroughly boned, at least until industrial capabilities catch up.

View on HN

I can't help being annoyed by how the West first exterminated malaria at home, and then, once they were safe, started worrying about the ecological consequences of doing the same in Africa.

I think it's a bit more complicated than that looking at the wiki article. It seems to have been very successful to begin with, but then the mosquitos became resistant to DDT and western countries have a climate advantage. Notably, they did try it in poorer countries too.

And a ton of kerosene. Spray it on all bodies of water and the larva can't breathe.

Malaria is why the first attempt at the Panama canal failed. Kerosene is partly why it became successful.

DDT was also used incorrectly. It was supposed to be sprayed on walls, so it was made to be persistent. Naturally farmers crop-dusted it on their fields, and that made it an environmental problem.

During cabin decompression, you put your oxygen mask on first, then help others.

I think the right analogy for the GP post is putting your oxygen mask on and then telling your seatmate they shouldn’t be flying due to climate change.

If all kids in your neighborhood get sick, including yours.

Do you first try to heal your kid or everyone at the same time?

> Malaria used to be common in the US until the 1950s or so.

I had no idea of that, as I suspect many given the time past if you wasn't around then. Did a little digging and nicely covered here: https://www.cdc.gov/malaria/about/history/index.html

Which makes me wonder - what the cost of malaria drugs are and how much would it cost to eradicate it. Equally have the true environmental and ecological aspects of eradication methods been analysed. I wasn't aware that mosquito's were pollinators until a while back, not that anything usurps Bee's, but many insects are pollinators and in some area's they may even be crucial as a species.

After all the 1950's approach was basic killing of the mosquito's and whilst that may of been a solution for one area like the US, I'm not sure that approach would be taken as much today and for Africa, certainly as I mentioned, the whole pollinator aspect of mosquito's may make for a more fragile ecosystem that removal of a species would be more impaction than the gains.

I always found it fascinating that malaria has been around so long that a genetic mutation evolved in some that makes them immune to it.

Afaik mosquitoes don’t really contribute ecologically. They are just nuisance.

I recall a town in Texas decided to wipe out the local bat population due to fear of rabies. The next year they had a major scourge of mosquitoes. Turns out bats mostly eat mosquitoes. They let the bats resettle the area.

Bats eat tons of mosquitoes. Some outfits encourage and help people set up bat friendly enclosures to deal with local mosquito problems.

There's IIRC a single-digit number of mosquito species carrying malaria and a slightly higher number of mosquito species targeting humans - as compared to hundreds of species of mosquito. Kill the carriers off and they just get replaced by some other specie of mosquito.

Lets face it, if the same Malaria mortality rate happened in the West, we wouldn't (and historically didn't) wait for vaccines - we'd pave over an entire ecosystem if we had to. We'd do the same even if we had the same death rate as the group that got vaccinated.

Well bats certainly haven’t caused us any major global health problems recently...

While the bat origin of Covid 19 is plausible, it hasn't been conclusively demonstrated. The gain of function lab leak is just as plausible, and equally unproven -- due to the Chinese dictatorship's suspicious lack of transparency and cooperation.

Lab escape is still bat origin, just potentially with a human assist (or human mistake with an unaltered virus.)

Sure, and they’re a large viral reservoir, but I’d hope we don’t think that’s a good reason to eradicate them. They don’t typically come into our homes the way mosquitos do; we go to theirs.

They are the food for birds. Not sure how big that chunk is. Also mosquito's larvae is a water predator, might be an important ecological niche in water reservoirs.

Malaria has killed so many people I don't really care if wiping them out starts a trophic cascade, it would probably still kill fewer people than malaria. If we had to give up condors and bees, I'd still think it a fair trade.

With the bees will go lots of foods that depend on them for pollination. Bees are very essential for agriculture.

Actually very few of our foods, and none of our staple crops rely significantly on insects for pollination. Grapes for instance, can use insects but don't have significant problems in their absence.

Bees are just another legacy producer ripe for disruption. With recent Progress in AI and Drone technology the question isn’t if Bees get replaced by autonomous Nanobots but when.

I remember when I was a kid the EMP trucks went around to keep the nano swarms down, but most of us got bot-lung anyway.

Even rogue nanoswarms are less worrisome than mosquitos as a vector.

It used to be common in southern Europe as well and was an absolute scourge in SEA until the 20th century.

Not just Southern Europe. Oliver Cromwell (English ruler in 1600s) died of malaria.

Malaria in North America and England is covered pretty well in Mann’s 1493. There are a couple kinds of malaria, one more resistant to cold than the other.

No doubt the indigenous Americans had it bad, to put it mildly, but reading the accounts of early colonization efforts in that book, I mean, damn. Wave after wave of colonists, each losing 50+% in the first year (and it’s not like the survivors stopped dying then). For years on end, across multiple colonies. Mostly to disease.

That's awesome trivia!

Reply on news.ycombinator.com