Breaking:
Zika Outbreak Epicenter in Same Area Where GM Mosquitoes Were
Released in 2015
29 January, 2015
(ANTIMEDIA) U.S.A.
— The
World Health Organization announced it will convene an
Emergency Committee under International Health Regulations on Monday,
February 1, concerning the Zika virus ‘explosive’ spread
throughout the Americas. The virus reportedly has the potential to
reach pandemic proportions — possibly around the globe. But
understandingwhy this
outbreak happened is vital to curbing it. As the WHOstatement said:
“A
causal relationship between Zika virus infection and birth
malformations and neurological syndromes … is strongly suspected.
[These links] have rapidly changed the risk profile of Zika, from a
mild threat to one of alarming proportions.
“WHO
is deeply concerned about this rapidly evolving situation for 4 main
reasons: the possible association of infection with birth
malformations and neurological syndromes; the potential for further
international spread given the wide geographical distribution of the
mosquito vector; the lack of population immunity in newly affected
areas; and the absence of vaccines, specific treatments, and rapid
diagnostic tests […]
“The
level of concern is high, as is the level of uncertainty.”
Zika
seemingly exploded out of nowhere. Though it was first discovered in
1947, cases only sporadically occurred throughout Africa and southern
Asia. In 2007, the first case was reported in the Pacific. In 2013, a
smattering of small outbreaks and individual cases were officially
documented in Africa and the western Pacific. They also began showing
up in the Americas. In May 2015, Brazil reported its first case of
Zika virus — and the situation changed dramatically.
Brazil
is now considered the
epicenter of the Zika outbreak, which coincides with at least 4,000
reports of babies born with microcephaly just
since October.
When
examining a rapidly expanding potential pandemic, it’s necessary to
leave no stone unturned so possible solutions, as well as future
prevention, will be as effective as possible. In that vein, there was
another significant development in 2015.
Oxitec
first unveiled its
large-scale, genetically-modified mosquito farm in Brazil in July
2012, with the goal of reducing “the
incidence of dengue fever,” as The
Disease Daily reported.
Dengue fever is spread by the same Aedes mosquitoes which spread the
Zika virus — and though they “cannot
fly more than 400 meters,” WHO
stated, “it
may inadvertently be transported by humans from one place to
another.” By
July 2015, shortly after the GM mosquitoes were first released into
the wild in Juazeiro, Brazil, Oxitec proudly announced they
had “successfully
controlled the Aedes aegypti mosquito that spreads dengue fever,
chikungunya and zika virus, by reducing the target population by more
than 90%.”
Though
that might sound like an astounding success — and, arguably, it was
— there is an alarming possibility to consider.
Nature,
as one Redditor keenly pointed
out,
finds a way — and the effort to control dengue, zika, and other
viruses, appears to have backfired dramatically.
Juazeiro,
Brazil — the location where genetically-modified mosquitoes were
first released into the wild.
Map
showing the concentration of suspected Zika-related cases
of microcephaly in
Brazil.
The
particular strain of Oxitec GM mosquitoes, OX513A, are genetically
altered so the vast majority of their offspring will die before they
mature — though Dr. Ricarda Steinbrecher published concerns in
a report
in September 2010 that
a known survival rate of 3-4 percent warranted further study before
the release of the GM insects. Her concerns, which were echoed by
several other scientists both at the time and since, appear to have
been ignored — though they should not have been.
Those
genetically-modified mosquitoes work to control wild, potentially
disease-carrying populations in a very specific manner. Only the male
modified Aedes mosquitoes are supposed to be released into the wild —
as they will mate with their unaltered female counterparts. Once
offspring are produced, the modified, scientific facet is supposed to
‘kick in’ and kill that larvae before it reaches breeding age —
if tetracycline is not present during its development.
But there is a
problem.
According
to an unclassified document from
the Trade and Agriculture Directorate Committee for Agriculture dated
February 2015, Brazil is the third largest in “global
antimicrobial consumption in food animal production” —
meaning, Brazil is third in the world for its use of tetracycline in
its food animals. As a study by the American Society of Agronomy, et.
al., explained, “It
is estimated that approximately 75% of antibiotics are not absorbed
by animals and are excreted in waste.” One
of the antibiotics (or antimicrobials) specifically named in that
report for its environmental persistence is tetracycline.
In
fact, as a confidential internal
Oxitec document divulged
in 2012, that survival rate could be as high as 15% — even with low
levels of tetracycline present. “Even
small amounts of tetracycline can repress” the
engineered lethality. Indeed, that 15% survival rate was described by
Oxitec:
“After
a lot of testing and comparing experimental design, it was found that
[researchers] had used a cat food to feed the [OX513A] larvae and
this cat food contained chicken. It is known that tetracycline is
routinely used to prevent infections in chickens, especially in the
cheap, mass produced, chicken used for animal food. The chicken is
heat-treated before being used, but this does not remove all the
tetracycline. This meant that a small amount of tetracycline was
being added from the food to the larvae and repressing the [designed]
lethal system.”
Even
absent this tetracycline, as Steinbrecher explained, a
“sub-population” of genetically-modified Aedes mosquitoes could
theoretically develop and thrive, in theory, “capable of
surviving and flourishing despite any further” releases of
‘pure’ GM mosquitoes which still have that gene intact. She
added, “the effectiveness of the system also depends on the
[genetically-designed] late onset of the lethality. If the time of
onset is altered due to environmental conditions … then a 3-4%
[survival rate] represents a much bigger problem…”
As
the WHO stated in its press release, “conditions associated
with this year’s El Nino weather pattern are expected to increase
mosquito populations greatly in many areas.”
Incidentally,
President Obama called for a massive
research effort to
develop a vaccine for the Zika virus, as one does not currently
exist. Brazil has now called in 200,000
soldiers to
somehow help combat the virus’ spread. Aedes mosquitoes have
reportedly been spotted in
the U.K. But perhaps the most ironic — or not —proposition was
proffered on January 19, by the MIT
Technology Review:
“An
outbreak in the Western Hemisphere could give countries including the
United States new reasons to try wiping out mosquitoes with genetic
engineering.
“Yesterday,
the Brazilian city of Piracicaba said it would expand the use of
genetically modified mosquitoes …
“The
GM mosquitoes were created by Oxitec, a British company recently
purchased by Intrexon, a synthetic biology company based in Maryland.
The company said it has released bugs in parts of Brazil and the
Cayman Islands to battle dengue fever.”
From the Daily Mail in Britain
Are
scientists to blame for Zika virus? Researchers released genetically
modified mosquitos into Brazil three years ago
- Didcot-based
firm Oxitec genetically modified mosquitoes in 2012
- They
were released into Brazil to target disease-carrying insects
- It
has led to claims the modified bugs could have sparked Zika outbreak
- But
Oxitec denies this and has been asked to expand its work in Brazil
The maintream has wasted no time in labelling this as "conspiracy theory"
Amidst
all the fear surrounding the Zika virus outbreak, there is an
egregious bit of misinformation being circulated that the outbreak
could somehow be the result of genetically modified mosquitoes that
were being tested to control mosquito populations.
According
to a report in Business Insider which was the first to refute the
story, the theory of seems to have originated on the social media
site Reddit (under the subcategory ‘conspiracy’). Subsequently,
an article titled “GMO mosquitoes could be cause of Zika outbreak,
critics say,” appeared on the website of Russia Today (a government
funded news network that is known to promote conspiracy theories). A
day later, the UK tabloid Daily Mail published a similar piece with
the title “Are scientists to blame for Zika virus? Researchers
released genetically modified mosquitos into Brazil three years ago.”
Worryingly, more articles are appearing on smaller news outlets and
being shared on other social media sites as well.
The
idea carries no scientific weight or credibility, and such news
reports also highlight the same kind of poor reporting that
undermined legitimate communication efforts during the Ebola outbreak
last year, threatening to move focus away from what is
important—making sure that people receive the most up to date and
accurate information possible.
Oxitec,
the company behind the trials, are attempting to reduce the
population of the Aedes aegypti mosquitoes which are the major
vectors for carrying mosquito borne diseases like dengue, chikungunya
and Zika by creating genetically engineering sterile males. The
trials that have been conducted in the past few years have proved so
successful that the city of Piracicaba recently entered into an
agreement with Oxitec to expand its efforts and build a larger
facility. (See this GLP article from last week for a detailed look at
how the mosquito works).
You
don’t have to look too far beneath the surface to see that the
recent claims of modified mosquitoes causing Zika have no merits.
There is no evidence presented and the chief ‘critical’ quote is
taken from a 2012 comment made by Helen Wallace, head of the anti-GMO
group GeneWatch in response Oxitec’s mosquito trials conducted that
year. For a thorough debunking of the claims in the Zika conspiracy
theory, see this blog which breaks down several conspiracies
surrounding the Zika outbreak. Lydia Ramsey of Business Insider also
makes several pertinent points as to why no one should believe in it.
And when she actually interviewed an expert, this is what he said:
When
we chatted with Alex Perkins, a Notre Dame biological sciences
professor, about the Zika mosquito conspiracy, he told us nothing
could be farther from the truth.
In
fact, “It could very well be the case that genetically modified
mosquitos could end up being one of the most important tools that we
have to combat Zika,” Perkins said. “If anything, we should
potentially be looking into using these more.”
The
world will always have conspiracy theorists. But my ire in this case,
is not directed at them. Instead it is more at reporters and editors
who think it is appropriate to publish unfounded claims with no
supporting information whatsoever. The Daily Mail is not known for
its quality of reporting but it is a newspaper with a very large
readership, both in print and online. Mail Online, the website of the
Daily Mail has over 11.4 million daily visitors, and by all measures
Russia Today is widely viewed as well, given that the article has
been shared close to 15,000 times on Facebook. Achieving such a large
reader base comes a degree of responsibility which increases greatly
during a time of crisis, when the need for information is extremely
high.
The
2014 Ebola outbreak was a watershed moment for health reporting that
we can look back to see how misinformation changed the outlook of the
epidemic. Social media in retrospect had made things better and
worse—better in that it easier to get the right word out about what
people can and should do in a health emergency, but worse in that it
is harder to control the spread of misinformation. As Victor
Luckerson wrote in TIME during the Ebola crisis:
Trying
to stem the spread of bad information online actually shares many
similarities with containing a real-world virus. Infected Internet
users, who may have picked up bogus info from an inaccurate media
report, another person on social media or word-of-mouth, proceed to
“infect” others with each false tweet or Facebook post.
….
Moments
of crisis, when there’s a vacuum of accurate information, only
exacerbate this. “Fear has a role,” says Emilio Ferrara, a
postdoctoral fellow at Indiana University’s Center for Complex
Networks and Systems Research. “If I read something that leverages
my fears, my judgement would be obfuscated, and I could be more prone
to spread facts that are obviously wrong under the pressure of these
feelings.”
He
also quoted the role of the CDC in making accurate information
available, saying “Quick, accurate information disseminated as
widely as possible, experts say, is the only way to combat the spread
of falsities.”
We
are fighting a pandemic that has health officials around the world
scrambling for solutions. And we are doing so with a very limited set
of tools. The Oxitec mosquitoes has proved to be safe and successful
on a small scale and it will be many more years of testing and field
trials before we will know whether it can be used safely and
efficiently on a large scale. However, spreading misinformation about
its use only serves to promote fear and could potentially delay its
course – a dangerous outcome, given that this is unlikely to be the
last mosquito borne epidemic we will see.
In
a recent panel discussion conducted by the DC Science Writers
Association about reporting during the Ebola crisis, Joel Achenbach,
a reporter for the Washington Post talked about the responsibility of
the journalists, saying, “our challenge at the Post was to be a
good filter of the news so that we would not feed the hysteria.” We
are yet again faced with a similar situation ripe for the spread of
hysteria. Let’s hope we do better this time.
Posts
