Jump to content

Sterilising mosquitoes by radiology could halt spread of dengue fever


rooster59

Recommended Posts

Am I missing something here ?? So they treat the male mosquitoes and then release them....why do they bother treating them and not just kill them ?? The males that is.? If they spend time catching them then sorting them then treating them..save yourself. and just kill the males !! Same end result isn't it ..Can't fertilise the females when there dead..!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course they don't catch them. They breed them.

Then they release them and they mate with the females. Their offspring die before reaching reproductive age. The females are unable to have more offspring.

Clever stuff. But NOT a Thai innovation.

What a surprise.

Edited by dru2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well according to Google it's only the female mosquito that bites as it needs the protein to feed the eggs...can lay up to 3 times and 100 eggs each time...as someone else said why not treat the females also then

Here's what I get:

They breed mosquitoes, adding to the local population. According to your Google research, adding viable females to the local population is a bad thing.

The referenced treatment works on males, but not on females. Even if it did work on females, you'd still be releasing females (who do all the biting)

They treat the males, then release them to mate with indigenous females- beating the local males to the punch, creating offspring that will die instead of offspring that will bite.

Since the treatment doesn't sterilize females, they can't release them without increasing the indigenous population,

So they separate males from females before the treatment, and kill the females instead of releasing them to bite and make viable babies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally I think a water-based chemical to kill larvae..that could be widely available, & used by everyone to 'treat' all standing water near homes may help..as well as trying to educate the Thais to put lids on all their water-pots.

(Before you all scoff at me for suggesting using a chemical in water, just think of the unregulated amounts of spray the farmers put on fruit & veg here? That we all eat without a 2nd thought)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote : scientists are now able to differentiate between the sexes as the males have a significantly smaller head than the females.

You gotta love that one.

Yeah, but which head?

My point, precisely.

But I forgot that on TVF, you can't just 'hint', you have to be graphic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote : scientists are now able to differentiate between the sexes as the males have a significantly smaller head than the females.

You gotta love that one.

Yeah, but which head?

My point, precisely.

But I forgot that on TVF, you can't just 'hint', you have to be graphic.

But that would be neglecting the feminists that make up about 1.5% of TVF posters. Those who would hold out the smaller heads as proof positive of their long held belief that guys are idiots with small brains.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Coincidentally I just finished the hardware and software design for a precision Cobolt 60 dose control system. A couple of minor errors or miscommunication in the OP.

"which will be irradiated with 70 Gy (Gray) of Gamma rays for a little over a minute from Cobalt 60" - The 1 minute time depends on the age of the Cobolt source due to half-life. On the machine I used the source was 23 years old and would take 4 min 38 seconds for 70 Gy. The original source activity was 18 kGy/hour = 1.8 million rad/rem per hour. Currently it is at .9 kGy/hour or 900 rad/rem per hour.

70 Gy = 7000 rad. Table showing the biological effects at different doses in rad/rem.

  • 300-400 Serious radiation sickness; also marrow and intestine destruction; LD 50-70/30.
  • 400-1000 Acute illness, early death; LD 60-95/30.
  • 1000-5000 Acute illness, early death in days; LD 100/10.

2nd error - "The process poses no danger to human or pet animals as the intensity is comparable to radio-waves and micro-waves that we encounter on a daily basis"

Radio/microwaves are unrelated to Gamma irradiation. The former is non-ionizing radiation while the latter is ionizing radiation, that it is it strips electrons off.

x-rays for practical purposes in biological effects same as gamma. Hospital x-rays, .1 to .9 rad depending on area. CT scan, .05 to 4.5 rad

The machine we updated the control for.

24867366090_730223c627_z.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Stop trying to screw around with nature, just increase precautionary measures, medication and education on the risks.

Next we will have bloody radioactive midgies roaming around.

Spoken like a true Luddite. Vaccinations and medication,which I assume you have benefited from,is "messing around with nature" . I agree that education (in your case) might help.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.










×
×
  • Create New...