r/technology • u/lurker_bee • 23h ago

Biotechnology Burkina Faso says no to Bill Gates’ plan of creating modified species of mosquitoes

https://africa.businessinsider.com/local/lifestyle/burkina-faso-says-no-to-bill-gates-plan-of-creating-modified-species-of-mosquitoes/xyk7xm8
9.5k Upvotes

94% Upvoted

1.4k comments sorted by

View all comments

95

u/Expensive-Swan-9553 22h ago

It’s interesting to see the dedication in these comments to the idea:

1 bill gates plan is workable and it’s only roadblock is implementation

2 genetic manipulation is the path Burkina Faso must go to eliminate mosquito born illnesses

3 BF is saying no because they want diseases, which is obviously stupid on its face.

I wish for a better discourse because it’s an interesting topic and story unfortunately we’ve resigned the local discussion to giggling in our various biases.

98

u/VvvlvvV 21h ago

  1. Genetic modification of mosquitos has been proven to be effective at suppressing malaria in several attempts already. 

  2. Genetically modified mosquitos are the fastest and most accessible way for Burkina Faso to reduce the malaria burden, compared to other options.

  3. Burkina Faso is accepting a large loss of life and quality of life due to wanting to handle malaria domestically. 

The country can do what it chooses, but their are clear costs to this decision. The above is what is true according to the science and evidence.  Burkina Faso can work towards local solutions, great. I'm thinking about how many people will die because of a lack of trust.

-7

u/funone1990 18h ago

"Proven effective" is not the same as "proven safe and free of downstream consequences." But sure, go ahead. Not like scientific hubris has ever resulted in environmental catastrophe before... 🙄

17

u/Obscure_Occultist 17h ago

Let's go take a look at the alternatives of using GMO mosquitos.

Mass insecticide campaigns - It will certainly kill the mosquitos but will poison just about everything else, including humans. Depending on the insecticide used, you'll either get mild chemical contamination, causing adverse birth defects in local wild life and human populations or straight up collapse of the local biodiversity and animals that feed on mosquitos get poisoned and subsequently die, with animals that feed on those animals subsequently getting poisoned as well.

Draining wetlands - straight up environmental destruction of the local environment that isn't even garaunteed to stop the spread of mosquitos.

Mosquito nets - are stop gap solution that doesn't actually do anything about the mosquito problem. Only protects certain populations that possesses the nets, while also not combating the spread of disease. Its also completely dependent on the effectiveness of the nets itself.

Genuinely speaking, once you consider the alternative to GMO mosquitos, are there any alternatives you would rather go with?

-5

u/funone1990 15h ago

If the consequences of the solution end up being worse than the problem you are trying to solve, it would be better to do nothing at all.

4

u/Obscure_Occultist 15h ago

That logic is counterproductive, and you know it. All that line of thinking does is promote stagnation at best and garauntees ruination at worst.

Doing nothing at all in this situation garauntees thousands of deaths. People will die if we follow your logic. It's genuinely baffling you would even think about an idea like this.

-2

u/funone1990 14h ago

Sorry but it's not. There are solutions where low probability but high impact adverse events make it not worth it. Would you get on a plane that had a 1% chance of crashing? Of course not. Meddling in complex ecosystems with rapid genetic engineering carries the same kind of risk.

3

u/Obscure_Occultist 13h ago

My guy, all planes have a non-zero chance of crashing. Same with all vehicles, yet we continue to utilize them because that risk is worth the usage.

Additionally, in this case, the adverse effects are both known and measured. You're relying on fear of improbable and unknown concerns to dictate action. Do you know how insane that is? In theory, cooking your food could lead to your house burning down? Does that mean people should not cook their own food? No, cause thats insane. Same logic applies here because you shouldn't let theoretical probabilities get in the way of practical applications. If humanity was governed by the same backwards thinking, we wouldn't have made it out of the stone age.

1

u/funone1990 13h ago

GMO engineering is way more likely to go wrong, and in a far more catastrophic way than you are to crash your car.

1

u/Obscure_Occultist 13h ago edited 12h ago

My guy, you just used a plane crashing as part of your analogy. You don't get to use the "dangers of everyday actions are inconsequential" line when you literally cited the risk of yet another everyday activity as to why you shouldn't do it.

Okay fine, let's play your game. Can you describe these risks? We've been using GMO mosquitos for nearly a decade at this point. Can you point to instances where using this technology to limit the mosquito population has caused "catastrophic" consequences?

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Phenomenomix 12h ago

More likely to go wrong than what?

9

u/VvvlvvV 18h ago

This is fear-mongering over things you don't understand. This is not DDT.

-4

u/funone1990 17h ago

I challenge you to prove there are no downstream consequences without making an appeal to authority.

12

u/VvvlvvV 16h ago

I didn't say there no downstream consequences. I'm saying the downstream consequences we know about with this method are incredibly low and we have evidence going back a decade. 

I understand the science behind the genetics involved. Its safe. The genes that spread make mosquitos resistant to malaria. That only, solely stops the spread of malaria. That is the main mechanism. Mosquitos in nature already have these genes. Scientists are working to increase that number. Scientists are mass breeding these resistant mosquitos then releasing them. 

No one is talking about killing all the mosquitos in relation to gene edited mosquitos. Its literally impossible and is used to cull mosquito populations - not eliminate them. 

-3

u/funone1990 15h ago

"we know about" is doing a lot of heavy lifting there.

4

u/VvvlvvV 14h ago

There is no amount of evidence that would be acceptable to people who act like you. This is what I meant by the fear mongering. 

-1

u/funone1990 13h ago

There is, but you don't have it. So instead of applying the precautionary principle, you've just decided to be dangerously ignorant about the risks.

2

u/VvvlvvV 12h ago edited 23m ago

I don't believe you. Prove it. Tell me exactly what evidence would convince you. 

You are dangerously ignorant about the risks. You clearly don't understand them and would prefer inaction and helplessness rather than informed risks. 

This whole thing is puerile. I presented information and evidence and was met with a brick wall of learned helplessness. 

3

u/Tylendal 15h ago

That is the rhetorical equivalent of a kid playing make-believe claiming to have an everything-proof invincibility shield.

You need to describe exactly which sort of potential downstream consequences you're concerned about, and by what mechanism you think they will come about. Otherwise you're just bragging of your ignorance on the subject and insisting it gives you validity.

You can't prove a negative.

-2

u/funone1990 14h ago

"You can't prove a negative."

Yeah dude, that's exactly why we shouldn't be meddling in complex ecosystems. We can't model what will happen on anything but a hyper-local and theoretical scale.

It will be fine in 99% of scenarios. Until it's not.

4

u/Tylendal 14h ago

"You can't prove a negative."

Yeah dude, that's exactly why we shouldn't be...

...."literally doing anything, ever" by your logic.

Better never take another step again, since there's a non-zero chance you might stumble and break your leg. Can't know 100%, so don't take that risk. /s

1

u/funone1990 13h ago

The consequences of most everyday risky activities are not even close to the magnitude of damage that can be done with haughty GMO engineering.

EVERYTHING in life involves risk. You make decisions based not just on probability, but on what the impact of the event would be. That's the precautionary principle.

1

u/Tylendal 13h ago

Okay. What is the specific impact that you're concerned about, and what mechanism would that come about by?

→ More replies (0)

4

u/FungalNeurons 17h ago

A good, recent review is available here: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41434-024-00468-8

We need to acknowledge that gene drives are very novel technology, and that once released they will spread throughout the entire species (and conceivably beyond via horizontal gene transfer). It isn’t unreasonable to express concern.

24

u/Sankofa416 22h ago

Nicely summarized. In my opinion, the only program BF should accept is one with equal domestic staff and scientists. That is the only way to make it accountable to the local government and not the (wildly shifting) US political climate.

The US gov has been putting very public pressure on corporations to act politically, so the Gates foundation is not enough insulation for a decades-long project.

7

u/belizeanheat 21h ago

I think point number one is decently summarized. The other two are not being suggested by anyone remotely serious

0

u/puffz0r 19h ago

that seems like a good summary of how reddit generally operates, one comment is a decent summary followed by 2 that aren't remotely serious

16

u/Expensive-Swan-9553 22h ago

I’d agree, I’m also sort of shocked to see Americans being upset or surprised at US-skepticism when their current admin’s line seems to be “fuck yall” directed at the world and also occasionally other Americans.

I’m not sure how that could engender trust or good will from other governments.

5

u/Moifaso 16h ago

Nicely summarized. In my opinion, the only program BF should accept is one with equal domestic staff and scientists. That is the only way to make it accountable to the local government and not the (wildly shifting) US political climate.

The program was already partnered with a local health institute and with a university in nearby Ghana, had an insectiary in BK, and obviously involved tons of locals, both at the ground level and in the healthcare sector.

It was already accountable to the local government. This thread's article mentions how several government agencies approved their program and new mosquito releases as recently as a month ago.

Is your demand that like, the genetically modified mosquitoes themselves need to be 50% created by locals? Do you not see how that obviously limits the program?

2

u/Sankofa416 14h ago

Your final statements are not on track, but I appreciate creating an argument. I would agree that BF personnel need to be present at every level of operations, even if BF has to pay for them. I don't think 50% is reasonable for outside the country. The national security implications at this point in history make that extremely necessary.

I have no idea how this can be done. Are there a population of scientists willing and able to work on this project from outside BF? How can trust be regained? The UN liaison put out a political landmine of a report (on BF 'violations against children') and got kicked out after a year on the job. I haven't read the report and don't know the author's credibility, yet.

The article paints this as a continuation of a trend the administration has been on with some civil society support (only one group cited as head of a coalition). Sounds like the standard behavior we demand here, but I don't know their politics enough to judge how informed the decision is. This doesn't seem to be a case of corruption. The program existed before this, but was a victim of the current political climate.

1

u/Moifaso 13h ago

I would agree that BF personnel need to be present at every level of operations, even if BF has to pay for them.

This defeats the point entirely. BK has neither the expertise nor the money to do this. Their public services can't properly support their current population, and half the country is occupied by Islamists. The country has already lost tens of millions in malaria prevention $ after USAID was killed.

The national security implications at this point in history make that extremely necessary.

It's interesting how you're taking the junta's reasoning here as just self-evidently true/inevitable. The mechanics of how or why this program would even threaten "national security" just aren't important, I guess. It's connected to the "west" so we'll just assume it magically undermines the local order.

I guess I'd just ask you to consider that a significant part of the government's recent "anti imperialist" actions and claims aren't so much based on real, material concerns, as they are plays for support and a convenient way to distract and blame government failures on outsiders.

Most of it, in fact, is state-sponsored propaganda that is based on nothing substantial. I ask you to compare this AI video with 1M+ views of Traore lambasting the IMF, and many of the real speeches he's given where he attacks the org and says he's independent from western interests, to the reality of the BK government continually asking the IMF for more loans and adhering to their conditions.

I have no idea how this can be done. Are there a population of scientists willing and able to work on this project from outside BF? How can trust be regained? The UN liaison put out a political landmine of a report (on BF 'violations against children') and got kicked out after a year on the job.

Look up why she was only a year into the job. A critical UN report isn't the outlier here, a military government that exiles, jails, and forcibly conscripts all dissenters is.

And I mean, I haven't read the report, but anyone even remotely familiar with the war in the country knows that both sides are implicated in just about every war crime you can imagine.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_massacres_in_Burkina_Faso (non-exhaustive list)

The article paints this as a continuation of a trend the administration has been on with some civil society support (only one group cited as head of a coalition). Sounds like the standard behavior we demand here, but I don't know their politics enough to judge how informed the decision is. This doesn't seem to be a case of corruption. 

My concern with the decision is that it's a bad decision that will kill people and make the country even more unstable. Whether this particular decision is "corrupt" or not (whatever that means in the context of a military dictatorship) doesn't really matter.

1

u/Sankofa416 8h ago

I think a local response team is essential for such a program. Malaria is a scourge on humanity, but to perform such a program where you don't have safe access to many of the affected areas seems ill advised. Maybe the whole thing was small scale and sensible, but I don't have those details. A stable local government

It's interesting how you're taking the junta's reasoning here as just self-evidently true/inevitable. The mechanics of how or why this program would even threaten "national security" just aren't important, I guess. It's connected to the "west" so we'll just assume it magically undermines the local order.

I don't know what the states reasoning is beyond this article. Relatively recent history itself is the source of my statement. I'm not exercising much imagination to predict possible interference. Relatively high or low chance I can't say without much more.

I guess I'd just ask you to consider that a significant part of the government's recent "anti imperialist" actions and claims aren't so much based on real, material concerns, as they are plays for support and a convenient way to distract and blame government failures on outsiders.

It might be to shore up local legitimacy, true. I'm not judging based on their intentions, I'd expect a self serving intention a lot of the time. The condition of science funding and cuts to aid have me worried the resources to recover from an error won't be there, but maybe I'm US centric or have too low a tolerance for risk. I know the gene drive tech may already be available for home biohackers.

-9

u/rewind2482 22h ago

When dealing with many African governments the question then becomes how much corruption is acceptable…the multimillionaires giving to the Gates Foundation don’t want to hear about their money going to bribery. But without it, nothing gets done.

2

u/Sankofa416 21h ago

No one who is high up at a multi-national corporation level is naive about corruption. We have the same problem in the US and that problem is political instability - will the project be finished at any cost at all?

I think BF has more cause to worry about that at the present.

0

u/rewind2482 20h ago

However uncertain the political stability is of the US, it is exponentially more certain than the political stability of Burkina Faso, so that line doesn’t seem to work.

This is politics at its finest: score quick easy points with “US bad” while people die.

2

u/sexonth 16h ago

They don't want it because they distrust the west, rightfully so.

Burkina Faso isn't some playground guinea pig for their genetic experiments.

8

u/yoshiary 22h ago

It's almost as if people have been propagandized on the subject. A subject involving one of the richest men in the world who made his fortune in technology. Weird, that.

9

u/Opulent-tortoise 20h ago

You should really read about Traore’s incompetence before assuming that people criticizing Traore are propagandized

0

u/yoshiary 20h ago

I think people who support Bill Gates are propagandized. The same with any billionaire. Bezos, Musk, Adelson, Buffet...

3

u/Livid_Zucchini_1625 16h ago

there are decades of valid reasons for Black people to distrust Americans especially when it comes to medical and genetic initiatives. The Tuskegee experiments among many. They have been the brunt of testing all kinds of things so why would this be different? I mean that from a valid distrust point of view not the actuality that this is actually a good thing

3

u/HugaBoog 22h ago

This is reddit my friend. See these expectations your have? Decrease them wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyy down. And then some more.

1

u/light-triad 13h ago

The problem is any debate on this is going to be trash, because the critics aren’t going to bother read(and frankly are not qualified to understand) the research on the topic. So the discussion is just going to be one group of people saying that we should probably trust the experts on the best ways to combat malaria, and another group of people claiming they shouldn’t be trusted because they’re working for a corrupt billionaire, which totally ignores if the idea is good or not and is not really an interesting discussion.

1

u/chengiz 13h ago

It's Reddit. Bill Gates despite the metoo stuff is on the liberal side so he's an acceptable rich dude who can only do good. Ergo anyone who says no to him must be bad.

0

u/AuRevoirBaron 21h ago

Strangely imperialistic comment section for Reddit

0

u/Dpek1234 19h ago

Not really

That wouldvbe a comment senction heavly suggesting to invade so the problem can be dealt with

0

u/Tough_Dish_4485 20h ago

You forgot 4 People defending this completely indefensible decision

0

u/MikuEmpowered 6h ago

  1. It's not "bills plan" it's his foundations. They been putting work behind this and vaccines long before this clown came to being.

  2. You know how malaria is cured? By anti malaria IV, for 2 weeks, then switch to oral until it's gone. For a country without advanced medical capability, modified mosquito is literally the only way.

  3. It's a military dictatorship clown, who believes long term Western help always have strings attached, and "self-sufficiency" is the way forward. But he accepts humanitarian work.

If it was any other virus, then sure, gene edit might not be the only plan. But this is like Poli fighting. The consequence is severe enough you want it gone and NOT come back.

-3

u/aladeen222 22h ago

The same man who is buying up all the farmland and wants to inject technology into human bodies.