Malaria and Mosquitos

[keithd]

I watched some of QI last night, missed the start but switched on as Mr Fry was talking about mosquitos and malaria. One fact staggered me, over half the people that have ever lived on this planet have been killed by mosquitos. thats a staggering figure!

the part that i just caught was i was interested to learn Bill Gates and some other chappy are spending billions in order to wipe out Malaria. In principle of course this is a good thing, but a good point was made in saying that mossies and malaria are a good polenator, they keep the numbers down. harsh but very very true. Is it therefore right that people continue to play God in this fashion?

i remember the storm of 87 (stick with me), there was footage of many thousands of trees blown down and once it had all calmed down Man then started replanting trees in certain areas. it was noticed after 5,6 or 7 years that where Man had planted trees almost all of them had failed to flourish, yet where things were left alone trees and plant life had once again bloomed. Thoughout history there have been storms, yet trees are still here. Man will be killed by disease yet will continue to survive. Ambiguous linkage granted, but i hope you see my point

Anyway, dont discuss this any further, i just wanted to say something

[Milky Bar Kid]

Even though you do not wish me to discuss this Keiffy, I will! LOL!

Kind of agree. Think we do play God too much and at the end of the day, there needs to be some sort of natural selection process or the world would become over run.

[thulfi]

Not that I don't see the point you're driving at Keith, but thousands in the West die from Malaria each year, whereas more than a million die from the disease in Sub-saharan Africa, with the vast majority of the victims being children.

And sub-saharan Africa isn't really a part of the world where 'population control' is pivotal for the rest of the world. Humans developing new medicines isn't us playing God, it's simply survival of the fittest - us.

Where would we be without penicillin, etc? Every species has the right for self preservation. The 'playing God' issue for me isn't about allowing diseases to continue to wipe out our own but rather when we interfere with saving endangered species for example. Then we are interfering with natural selection.

[Milky Bar Kid]

Thulfi do you not think that is a little hypocritical though? It's ok to find ways not to kill the human race but lets not interfere with endangered species? Why are we any better?

[bris]

What about cancer then. Should we stop looking for a cure for that? that kills the rest of the population the malaria misses. If we can find a cure for any disease we can always say we are correcting god's mistakes if it makes you feel any better about it.

[gruntygiggles]

What does it have to do with God?

We, as humans will only be here for a finite amount of time. We are just a phase in earths history. I think it's good that we at least recognise the bad we have done and are trying to fix it, but when you look at the world as a planet, we really won't ever make much of a difference. We'll be gone one day, along with pretty much everything else and a new cycle will begin.

Regarding Mosquitos and malaria, yes, it's crazy. It is the biggest killer in the world. Seconded by Diahorrea which, unfortunately is killing almost as many as malaria.

[thulfi]

Thulfi do you not think that is a little hypocritical though? It's ok to find ways not to kill the human race but lets not interfere with endangered species? Why are we any better?

It's not ok. We should save endangered species. That was just an example I gave of us playing God. Before we were around, animals would get extinct and others would flourish, without any inteference.

As humans, we have 'taken over' the Earth so to speak due to natural selection, ie the capacity of our brain to develop towns, medicines etc. I was merely saying that self preservation of ourselves isn't playing God, it's natural selection/survival of the fittest. Preventing certain animals from getting extinct (when they should have been some time ago) may on the other hand be considered intefering with natural selection...

...which is no biggy imo and we should. I just don't think you can compare developing drugs/saving more humans to saving endangered species.

[Spikenipple]

We'll need to stop growing on this planet as a species quite soon indeed; the human population is currently just under 7 billion but we're running out of useful/habitable land already. Developed countries have been buying land in less developed countries for years as fallow for when they run out of space.

[Biker Biggles]

We'll need to stop growing on this planet as a species quite soon indeed; the human population is currently just under 7 billion but we're running out of useful/habitable land already. Developed countries have been buying land in less developed countries for years as fallow for when they run out of space.

Indeed.The Attenborough point which is the elephant in the room.(talking of endangered species:p)
Its no longer a case of should we play god,more a case of we have to play god because we have developed to the extent that we can wipe out other species,and destroy the world.With that ability comes responsibility and failure to limit human expansion,and protect other species will ultimately result in our own destruction.
Possibly sooner rather than later.

[SoulKiss]

What about cancer then. Should we stop looking for a cure for that? that kills the rest of the population the malaria misses. If we can find a cure for any disease we can always say we are correcting god's mistakes if it makes you feel any better about it.

Well there is an argument for NOT treating genetic conditions.

Goes along the lines of if people die of these before they pass them on then the disease dies out.

Before anyone says anything, yes I do have one of these types of condition, as does my father, who would probably be dead by now without treatment, so it DOES/WOULD affect me.

So, maybe the cure for cancer is to test people, and if they are shown to have these conditions, stop them having children and spreading the disease.

Me, I'll happily keep taking the meds...

[embee]

Everyone dies of something. If we cure cancer for example, death rates from other things will increase. Have these other things suddenly got more threatening? Of course not, just substitution.

I'm afraid I'm a pessimist regarding the future of the human race. Far too many people in the world, and in more and more regions it's no longer survival of the fittest, the breed is getting less robust. Worse environment, people less well suited to live in it, not a good trend. One good virus will sort us out (imagine something crossed between HIV and Flu, maybe a bit of Ebola thrown in).

The ants will survive though.

[thulfi]

There are simply too many variables (natural disasters, wars, disease, etc) to see us surviving as a species for any significant period of time in my opinion.

Anybody heard about the Toba catastrophe theory and the bottleneck of human evolution?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toba_catastrophe_theory

A massive volcanic eruption around 70,000 years ago reduced the human population to 10,000 and 1,000 breeding pairs, plunging the planet in a 10year volcanic winter.

That almost finished us off then, and 70,000 years is zilch considering the Earth is 4.5billions years old and life appeared within a billion years of the Earths existence.

Who knows what lies around the corner and what will ultimately finish us off?!

edit: And really we've been around for such a minor time.
http://www.science.uct.ac.za/images/science.uct.ac.za/students/resources/posters/life_on_earth.jpg

fish aroud for more than 420million years, humans less than 2 million. I'd like to see us even get to 3million.

[beabert]

I think humans will be around for a long time, what ever is thrown at them a few are going to survive somewhere. Things will only get worse though, there are just too many of us.

[gruntygiggles]

I think humans will be around for a long time, what ever is thrown at them a few are going to survive somewhere. Things will only get worse though, there are just too many of us.

We don't evolve quickly enough. Species, mostly in the world of entomology reproduce at such a rate that evolution of the species can sometimes be quick enough that a species can become immune to certain diseases, aclimatised to new conditons, adapted to new habitat and so on. The human race does not have that ability. There are so many things that could happen on earth that could render it inhabiltable by any human. The only way around that would be to send breeding fertile humans into space until a way could be found to re-inhabit earth safely.

We know for sure that one day the Yellowstone Caldera will blow. When that happens, the ash cloud will mean earths temperature will plummet, seas and rivers will be poisi=oned by the ash, the sun will be blocked out, I think it's called a Nuclear winter. Anyway, the Yellowstone Caldera has blown every 600,000 years almost like clockwork. It's last explosion was 640,000 years ago! Call it an explosion not an eruption as Calderas don't act the same way a volcano does.

Anyway, point is, there's plenty that could happen that could render the human race extinct.

[beabert]

We don't evolve quickly enough. Species, mostly in the world of entomology reproduce at such a rate that evolution of the species can sometimes be quick enough that a species can become immune to certain diseases, aclimatised to new conditons, adapted to new habitat and so on. The human race does not have that ability. There are so many things that could happen on earth that could render it inhabiltable by any human. The only way around that would be to send breeding fertile humans into space until a way could be found to re-inhabit earth safely.

We know for sure that one day the Yellowstone Caldera will blow. When that happens, the ash cloud will mean earths temperature will plummet, seas and rivers will be poisi=oned by the ash, the sun will be blocked out, I think it's called a Nuclear winter. Anyway, the Yellowstone Caldera has blown every 600,000 years almost like clockwork. It's last explosion was 640,000 years ago! Call it an explosion not an eruption as Calderas don't act the same way a volcano does.

Anyway, point is, there's plenty that could happen that could render the human race extinct.

I disagree, we dont need to evolve quickly, we are intelligent enough to create technology to help us survive. Sure well over 99% of would might be taken out, but with 600,000 years warning, some guys somewhere will be trying to survive it. Also ny then we be able to customise our genetics to to live in all kinds of conditions.

[Berlin]

So we don't need to worry about global warming then? :)

It could be argued (not by me, I'm too busy being a pampered westerner) that the last thing impoverished countries need in the Malaria belt is a population explosion from the eradication of malaria.

Mr D is right in that it's a very effective control of population numbers. Probably the only one ahead of AIDS.

Mother Nature will find a way though and it'll just come up with something else.

I think we sometimes forget we are part of nature and not above it.

One asteriod, One supervolcano, One ice age, One new disease and it may well be over. And ironically, those that still remember how to live a subsistence lifestyle will be best place to survive!.

Anyway, I'm off to do something that doesn't matter, in the grand scheme of things :)

C

[gruntygiggles]

So we don't need to worry about global warming then? :)

It could be argued (not by me, I'm too busy being a pampered westerner) that the last thing impoverished countries need in the Malaria belt is a population explosion from the eradication of malaria.

Mr D is right in that it's a very effective control of population numbers. Probably the only one ahead of AIDS.

Mother Nature will find a way though and it'll just come up with something else.

I think we sometimes forget we are part of nature and not above it.

One asteriod, One supervolcano, One ice age, One new disease and it may well be over. And ironically, those that still remember how to live a subsistence lifestyle will be best place to survive!.

Anyway, I'm off to do something that doesn't matter, in the grand scheme of things :)

C

Best sentence of the thread so far.

I would love to hope that we, as a species could survive, but given that we have no way of knowing all of the effects of certain natural disasters, we have no way of planning for every eventuality and therefore no way of guaranteeing survival, even for a few. People stowing away in bunkers with all the scientific knowledge in the world can't do anything to stop certain eventualities.