Debating pros and cons of gene drives to control disease-carrying insects and other pests

Mosquitos may have killed more people than any other single cause. Credit: Ariel Davis
Mosquitos may have killed more people than any other single cause. Credit: Ariel Davis

British biotech company Oxitec plans to kick off a months-long experiment in which it will release billions of Aedes aegypti mosquitoes in California and Florida. But these aren’t just any mosquitoes — they’re genetically engineered so that they don’t bite, and will, if all goes according to plan, eventually reduce the population of mosquitoes in these areas.

Follow the latest news and policy debates on sustainable agriculture, biomedicine, and other ‘disruptive’ innovations. Subscribe to our newsletter.

Proponents say, at scale, such a program would result in:

  • Less mosquito-borne illness
  • Little ecological impact since mosquitoes are not a keystone species
  • Less pesticide use, currently used against mosquitoes, which means better protection of local plants and animals
  • Little or no negative impact on humans as the mosquitoes are safe, quick, and effective

Opponents say:

  • Mosquitoes may not be a keystone species, but other animals do eat them and so eliminating the insects may in fact have an ecological impact
  • There could be unintended consequences, such as a hybrid species or the creation of a new ecological niche that other animals, which carry potentially even more lethal diseases, could move into
  • It takes expensive, large-scale trials to have certainty about safety and efficacy
Follow the latest news and policy debates on sustainable agriculture, biomedicine, and other ‘disruptive’ innovations. Subscribe to our newsletter.

Others envision even more far-reaching applications, such as species conservation (by helping native species become immune to disease or even to the harsher conditions of climate change).

This is an excerpt. Read the original post here

{{ reviewsTotal }}{{ options.labels.singularReviewCountLabel }}
{{ reviewsTotal }}{{ options.labels.pluralReviewCountLabel }}
{{ options.labels.newReviewButton }}
{{ userData.canReview.message }}

Related Articles

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Does glyphosate—the world's most heavily-used herbicide—pose serious harm to humans? Is it carcinogenic? Those issues are of both legal and ...

Most Popular

ChatGPT-Image-May-7-2026-12_16_37-PM-2
Viewpoint: Are cancer rates ‘skyrocketing’ as RFK, Jr. and MAHA claims? The evidence says mostly the opposite
Screenshot-2026-04-13-at-1.39.26-PM
Viewpoint: ‘Safer for children?’ Stonyfield yogurt under fire for deceptive organic marketing
Screenshot-2026-04-22-at-10.46.29-AM
Viewpoint: How to counter science disinformation? Science journalist offers 12 practical tips
png-pill-omega-Supp-fish-oil
Millions take omega-3 fish oil for brain health. New research suggests it may do the opposite.
Screenshot-2026-04-23-at-11.00.36-AM
Regulators' dilemma: Thalidomide, Metformin, and the cost of getting drug approvals wrong
Picture1-5
Science Disinformation Gap: The transatlantic battle over social media and censorship
ChatGPT Image May 14, 2026, 09_51_35 PM
Facebook swamped by hundreds of thousands of scam ads for illegal or dangerous medical products
ChatGPT Image May 12, 2026, 01_21_30 PM
How big health brands are funding online medical misinformation 
ChatGPT-Image-May-12-2026-08_39_41-PM
GLP podcast: Big Pharma, Big Ag, Big Food—health harming industries or life-saving innovators?
Screenshot-2026-05-08-at-3.40.33-PM
Seeds of power: China turns to genetic engineering to become global superpower
glp menu logo outlined

Get news on human & agricultural genetics and biotechnology delivered to your inbox.