kelseyfrog 5 days ago

Because historically genociding a species carries a lot of baggage. It's not something you can intellectually reason someone into believing.

1
dragonwriter 5 days ago

That's not actually the reason—eradication efforts have not been avoided on this basis, indeed, mosquito eradication has long been a central pillar of efforts to control malaria. The reason for trying something else is that eradication efforts have rarely been completely successful and mosquitos are getting better and resisting them from the reproduction pressure imposed by the massive, sustained efforts at eradication, not because eradictation is something people want to avoid because “genociding” mosquitos is seen as undesirable.

GavCo 5 days ago

Idk, 7 articles over 10 years isn't very strong evidence of a raging debate

recursive 5 days ago

Surely this isn't the totality of all discourse on the subject.

objektif 5 days ago

I do not even think it is morality actually. It is just that citizens of western countries would absolutely like to see these mosquitos eliminated from their countries. It is just that they are against eliminating them in Africa, Latin America etc. In the name of being “concerned about ecological impact.” of doing so. Once global warming accelerates and some of those diseases such as dengue and zika become prevalent here in America public opinion will magically change haha.

recursive 5 days ago

Well you can count this western perspective as being in favor of mosquito elimination from the entire planet.

kelseyfrog 5 days ago

I hesitated adding an eight link. Alas, it was too few.

dragonwriter 5 days ago

People discuss lots of things, without those discussions being significant influences on policy.

Avoiding mosquito “genocide” has not been a signficant source of policy restraint on eradication efforts, a fact that many of those “discussions” you cite bemoan, but have had no substantial effect in changing.