[itake]

> No one can know the effects of Oxitec’s artificial DNA entering the human bloodstream through mosquito bites

I'm still not sure I understand the problem. This entire experiment feels like a much safer version of the time the USA released a massive amount of DDT to end polio transmission [0]. DDT is obviously horrible for humans, but now we also live in a country without polio. There are costs to everything. Nothing is perfect.

Please provide better evidence than "having non-natural DNA in your blood is bad".

[0] - https://academic.oup.com/envhis/article/22/4/696/4057684

[paul_f]

DDT is not "obviously horrible for humans". That's dubious. It has not been proven to be carcinogenic and is only listed as "probable".

[Turing_Machine]

Polio isn't spread by mosquitos. I think you're confusing it with something else.

[soperj]

Except that the DDT probably had little to no effect on the transmission of Polio, and the real reason we live in a country without polio is that we've got a vaccine against it.

[maxerickson]

Malaria was endemic in the US prior to the National Malaria Eradication Program, which used DDT.

[soperj]

Malaria is a completely different disease than Polio. Thanks.

[maxerickson]

Right, I didn't add any context in my first comment, but the point is that DDT and mosquito control were an important component of disease control in the United States, regardless of whether polio is relevant to the discussion or not.

[soperj]

That's exactly what my comment was about though, polio isn't relevant.

[mimixco]

I wrote a whole website about this, so I'm not really down to debate it with you. There's a lot to read about this, including source documents from Oxitec and the FDA. You can draw your own conclusions from the evidence that's there.

[selestify]

Not everyone has the time to read "a whole website," nor is everyone inclined to if you are unwilling to clear up a seemingly unscientific concept (DNA from GMO entities ending up in our genome).