Speaker 1: Today on Parts pervilion building a better mosquito trap, or
Speaker 1: to put it another way, better living through genetic engineering,
Speaker 1: we take a look at the environmental impacts of GMO mosquitoes,
Speaker 1: which may be flying by you very soon. Hello, and
Speaker 1: welcome back once again to Parts per Billion, the environmental
Speaker 1: podcast from Bloomberg Law. I'm your host, David Schultz, So
Speaker 1: I'm just gonna come right out and say it. I
Speaker 1: hate mosquitoes. I hate them. I hate everything about them.
Speaker 1: But you know who hates mosquitos even more than I do.
Speaker 1: The British biotech company ox Attach. They've developed a way
Speaker 1: to genetically engineer mosquitos to make them essentially unable to
Speaker 1: produce fertile offspring, which in theory reduces their numbers across
Speaker 1: entire populations. It's pretty cutting edge stuff that's already been
Speaker 1: deployed in other countries, and now the EPA just gave
Speaker 1: them the go ahead to test these mosquitos here in
Speaker 1: the US and with us today to talk about all
Speaker 1: the implications of this is environmental reporter Adam Allington. Adam,
Speaker 1: how are you doing pretty good? David? As good as
Speaker 1: could be expected these days? Yeah? Yeah, really? Before we
Speaker 1: get into what's going on with these specific mosquitos. Let's
Speaker 1: remind people what genetic modification is and how it's been
Speaker 1: used in the past in agriculture. You know, we we
Speaker 1: hear GMOs and we think we know what that is,
Speaker 1: but do we know what a GMO actually is. Yeah,
Speaker 1: genetic engineering has actually been around for a while and
Speaker 1: it's quite common in a number of basic food crops,
Speaker 1: everything from soybeans to corn, to canola and even you know,
Speaker 1: even salmon have been genetically engineered to grow larger and
Speaker 1: mature faster. But your typical genetic engineering case in in
Speaker 1: you know, your in your grocery basket would be some
Speaker 1: of those some of those food items that I mentioned
Speaker 1: that have been genetically engineered for things like herbicide resistance,
Speaker 1: insect resistance, drought tolerance, things that help the plant either
Speaker 1: resist the pesticide so you can spray and knock down
Speaker 1: the weeds, or the plant will be resistant to you know,
Speaker 1: these other pests or stresses in the environment. Right, So
Speaker 1: it's mainly just sort of an agricultural benefit where you
Speaker 1: go into a crop and you tweak some of the
Speaker 1: parts of the genome and make it, you know, a
Speaker 1: better crop for farmers. That's right, that's exactly right. But
Speaker 1: this is not that, like, this is something that's totally different,
Speaker 1: Like what's going on with these mosquitoes. Well, so here
Speaker 1: instead of you know, tweaking the genome on a corn variety,
Speaker 1: So what Oxytec is doing here is they're genetically engineering
Speaker 1: male mosquitoes from a species called eighties a gypty. This
Speaker 1: is a very common mosquito found in many places in
Speaker 1: the world. But they're genetically engineering the males. When they
Speaker 1: release these genetically engineered males into the wild, they mate
Speaker 1: with wild female mosquitoes, but only the male mosquitoes are
Speaker 1: able to survive, so the population then decreases as the
Speaker 1: number of females is reduced. Wow, so okay, let me
Speaker 1: just make sure I understand. So the mosquitoes are engineered
Speaker 1: so that only their male offspring survives, and that means
Speaker 1: you have a whole generation where it's just male mosquitos
Speaker 1: and obviously they're not breeding with each other, and then
Speaker 1: you have populations that go down. Is that the general idea,
Speaker 1: that's the general idea. These mosquitos are genetically engineered so
Speaker 1: that only male offspring survive. In fact, Oxtec's first field
Speaker 1: test of its second generation mosquitoes were released in Brazil
Speaker 1: a few years back, and the company says they achieved
Speaker 1: a ninety six percent suppression of the target the target species,
Speaker 1: the mosquitoes that they're trying to reduce the population, So
Speaker 1: that's quite significant. Yeah, and we should say here, you
Speaker 1: know why they're doing this. I mean, obviously, as I
Speaker 1: mentioned at the top, I don't like mosquitoes. I find
Speaker 1: them really annoying. But they're a little more than annoying
Speaker 1: for a lot of people in the world. They spread
Speaker 1: lots of really, really bad diseases. I've actually heard some
Speaker 1: people say the mosquitoes are the deadliest animal in the world,
Speaker 1: at least for humans. So tamping down mosquito populations could
Speaker 1: have huge public health impacts, right right, I mean, that's
Speaker 1: the whole reason for this entire this entire project is
Speaker 1: to reduce mosquito populations and thereby provide a tool for
Speaker 1: public health workers to fight these infectious diseases that are
Speaker 1: transferred through mosquito bites. And you're right, I mean, mosquitoes
Speaker 1: are commonly referred to as the most dangerous animal in
Speaker 1: the world. You know, they transmit diseases like zecavirus, yellow fever,
Speaker 1: dengay fever, I mean deng gave fever alone. You know,
Speaker 1: it impacts hundreds of thousands of people per year and
Speaker 1: you know, causes somewhere between twenty five thousand and thirty
Speaker 1: thousand deaths. So oh, and also, by the way, let's
Speaker 1: let's not let's not forget malaria. That's that's kind of
Speaker 1: a big one. Yeah, no, don't don't forget malaria. I mean, uh,
Speaker 1: you know, it's just a really in a lot of
Speaker 1: countries where people don't have access to uh ready, access
Speaker 1: to medicine or healthcare, these mosquito born illnesses are are
Speaker 1: quite deadly, and finding a way to limit mosquito populations
Speaker 1: would would be a significant tool that public health experts
Speaker 1: could could use. And that's why this there's so much
Speaker 1: interest in this mosquito project specifically. But your story talked
Speaker 1: about how the EPA gave this company the go ahead
Speaker 1: to start doing field tests in the Florida Keys and
Speaker 1: also later on in the Houston area. So if the
Speaker 1: EPA is involved, that must mean there are some environmental
Speaker 1: issues here, and I think it's pretty obvious to see
Speaker 1: what they might be. I mean, basically, driving a particular
Speaker 1: species of animal to near extinction on purpose. I mean,
Speaker 1: just that alone would be something that would raise some eyebrows. Right. Well,
Speaker 1: that's the you know, that's you're kind of hitting on.
Speaker 1: The key concern here is that anytime you release you know,
Speaker 1: man made genetic material into the environment, and and you
Speaker 1: know in a way that wasn't it wasn't designed to
Speaker 1: be introduced naturally, there are significant concerns of unintended consequences.
Speaker 1: I mean mosquitoes and I know you hate him, David,
Speaker 1: but like you know, they are part of a big
Speaker 1: part of the food chain and a lot of these
Speaker 1: ecosystems as well. They're food for birds, lots of other mammals. Yeah, okay, okay,
Speaker 1: But I mean also that there's a you know, a
Speaker 1: not completely unfounded concerned that you know, once once you
Speaker 1: start cross mixing genes between these genetically between genetically engineered
Speaker 1: species and wild species, that there could be some unintended
Speaker 1: hybridization cause, you know, causing potential, you know, properties that
Speaker 1: we didn't want that would actually make insects or weeds
Speaker 1: more resistant to pesticides, or that some of these mosquitoes
Speaker 1: could conversely end up being better vectors for spreading disease,
Speaker 1: if they are resistant to insecticides, or ways we would
Speaker 1: have of controlling the population. You hear about, you know,
Speaker 1: hybrid monster mosquitoes, things like that. And to be clear,
Speaker 1: EPA has looked into this. They haven't said exactly how
Speaker 1: they're you know, what they've done, but they have said
Speaker 1: they've looked into this issue and they say it's it's
Speaker 1: not not likely to be a factor, it wouldn't be
Speaker 1: a factor in this case. They've deemed it to be
Speaker 1: safe and that's why they've agreed to give oxs Attach
Speaker 1: this experimental use permit. All right, well, we're going to
Speaker 1: get a little bit more into what the EPA is
Speaker 1: doing to make sure there's no sort of Trassic Park
Speaker 1: scenario on our hands here. But we're going to take
Speaker 1: a quick break, so stay with us and we'll get
Speaker 1: more into this in just a bit. We are back
Speaker 1: and we're with Adam Allenton, an environmental reporter who covers
Speaker 1: agriculture and GMOs, and we're talking about GMO mosquitoes and
Speaker 1: the EPA's recent granting to a biotech company to start
Speaker 1: conducting field tests of a new GMO mosquito and one
Speaker 1: of the things I got from your story, Adam is
Speaker 1: that the field tests initially will be taking place on
Speaker 1: the Florida Keys, which are a you know, of course,
Speaker 1: an isolated set of islands. That makes me think that
Speaker 1: they're is still some concern. The fact that this is
Speaker 1: taking place on an island makes me think there's some
Speaker 1: concern that there will be some unintentional I guess, GMO mosquito,
Speaker 1: who could you know, fly out of the range and
Speaker 1: mate with you know, wild mosquitos unintentionally. Is that a possibility?
Speaker 1: Is that something that people are worried about and that
Speaker 1: the EPA is taking precautions for. Well, clearly, I think
Speaker 1: anytime you try something like this that hasn't been done before,
Speaker 1: you want to do it in a way that's controlled,
Speaker 1: as controlled as possible, with as little with as few risks.
Speaker 1: I can't say exactly why they chose the Florida Keys
Speaker 1: as one of their main test sites. I believe it
Speaker 1: has something to do with the presence of the mosquitos
Speaker 1: in that population. Yeah, that may also, I'm sure want
Speaker 1: to have a system that they can easily study the
Speaker 1: the you know, the the impacts in the controlled way.
Speaker 1: So an island is a good way to do that.
Speaker 1: But it should be noted they're also planning to do this,
Speaker 1: you know, the next year in Houston, so that's uh,
Speaker 1: you know, and with the ultimate goal to release these
Speaker 1: mosquitoes into the wild and lots of other places. So
Speaker 1: that is the final goal here, is to use these
Speaker 1: mosquitos as as a as a tool to cross breed
Speaker 1: with wild populations. I think that at the start, though,
Speaker 1: they want to do it in a way that's as
Speaker 1: controlled as possible where they can clearly study the cause
Speaker 1: and effect impacts. Yeah, I mean that's a good point, though.
Speaker 1: I just I can't imagine that after they release these
Speaker 1: in Houston that there's no I have to imagine that
Speaker 1: there will be some that will mate with other mosquitos
Speaker 1: outside of the Houston area, and those you know, well,
Speaker 1: they they are trying to cross breed these, They are
Speaker 1: trying to get these genetically engineered mosquitos to mate with
Speaker 1: the with the native population. Yeah, that's true. I guess
Speaker 1: that's that's the whole point of this, uh, the whole
Speaker 1: point of this task, right. I mean, they want to
Speaker 1: they want to see what the they want to get
Speaker 1: a number on what the population is before they release,
Speaker 1: and then what it is after and then they'll measure
Speaker 1: the total amount of the population after that and determine
Speaker 1: what the effect was of introducing those species. So, you know,
Speaker 1: it does have the potential to really alter the you
Speaker 1: know how these you know, how many of these species
Speaker 1: are able to exist in a certain area. So the
Speaker 1: last thing I wanted to ask you about is a
Speaker 1: potential backlash here because you know, we've had GMO's crops,
Speaker 1: as we mentioned earlier, on the market for twenty or
Speaker 1: probably more years. You know, some people still aren't comfortable
Speaker 1: with that, but I feel like GMO animals is like
Speaker 1: another a whole other level, and there could be you know,
Speaker 1: a big stigma against this. Yeah, the Oxetech has actually
Speaker 1: been trying to get this field test approved in Florida
Speaker 1: for for you know, several years now, and people in
Speaker 1: those communities have spoken out quite strongly that they don't
Speaker 1: want these genetically engineered species released into their environment. They're
Speaker 1: concerned that, you know, anytime you're talking about releasing these
Speaker 1: new traits, you could something could go sideways. In fact,
Speaker 1: it's actually this this phenomenon is called horizontal gene transfer,
Speaker 1: where a genetically engineered spec species transfers its traits into
Speaker 1: other species, and this could be something like antibiotic resistance
Speaker 1: that puts humans at risk or animals at risk. There
Speaker 1: could be ecological imbalances allowing certain plants to grow uncontrolled
Speaker 1: while others die out. And so there's just a lot
Speaker 1: of moving parts to this issue. And you know, environmental
Speaker 1: groups have spoken out quite strongly against this in some cases. Obviously,
Speaker 1: in terms of the food in our grocery carts, genetically
Speaker 1: engineered food crop have been had a stigma attached to
Speaker 1: them for a long time now. So I mean, this
Speaker 1: is just a very you know, this is the definition
Speaker 1: of a hot button issue where the science is a
Speaker 1: factor in the debate, but a lot of people have
Speaker 1: just a feeling that this is too risky. And so
Speaker 1: that's what the company is trying to do, what EPA
Speaker 1: is stuck in the middle of and you know, we're
Speaker 1: just going to see how it plays out at this point. Yeah,
Speaker 1: that's a great point, and that's one of the main
Speaker 1: reasons why I'm so interested in this is because you know,
Speaker 1: this isn't the situation where the the you know, the
Speaker 1: benefit of the genetic modification goes to the farmer mainly,
Speaker 1: and the potential risks could be you know unknown. This
Speaker 1: is a situation where the benefit of you know, genetically
Speaker 1: engineering these mosquitos would go to everyone. And so I
Speaker 1: think that really kind of scrambles the politics here because
Speaker 1: you know, these you know, if these GMO mosquitos really
Speaker 1: work as advertised, this could be a game changer for
Speaker 1: public health. And so I wonder how much that's going
Speaker 1: to change the debate around these mosquitos compared to you know,
Speaker 1: let's say GMO corn or GMO soy or things like that. Right, yeah,
Speaker 1: I mean, a public health application is another is a
Speaker 1: completely different species, if you will, versus say a you know,
Speaker 1: a better tasting potato. I mean, obviously with food crops.
Speaker 1: Another one of the concerns that anti gmo activists point
Speaker 1: to is the fact that you know, companies, once they've
Speaker 1: genetically engineered a trait into a seed, they can claim
Speaker 1: ownership of that organism, and that kind of creates that
Speaker 1: gives them extreme leverage on farmers to you know, to
Speaker 1: switch over to their their product and drives up costs.
Speaker 1: It promotes monocultures, but in a public health setting, it's
Speaker 1: kind of unknown. Territory here, you know, and what the
Speaker 1: public reaction would be if all of a sudden we
Speaker 1: see dramatic reduce reductions in some of these mosquito borne illnesses.
Speaker 1: I don't think anyone would say that's a bad thing obviously. Well,
Speaker 1: I guess we'll have to wait and see if there
Speaker 1: if there are drawbacks, But at this point, I think
Speaker 1: that's that's something a lot of people would be would
Speaker 1: welcome with open arms. Yeah, all right, Well that will
Speaker 1: do it for today's episode of Parts Rebellion. If you
Speaker 1: want more environmental news, check out our website news doot
Speaker 1: Bloomberg environment dot com. And also, if you like hearing
Speaker 1: Adam Allington talking about insects, check out his podcast The
Speaker 1: Business of Bees, which is him talking about another insect bees.
Speaker 1: Of course, it is fantastic. I definitely recommend it. Today's
Speaker 1: episode of Parts Rebellion was produced by myself along with
Speaker 1: Josh Block and Marisa Horn. Parts Rebillion was created by
Speaker 1: Jessica Coombs and Rachel Dagel. For today's episode is a
Speaker 1: Message by Jazarre and buzz Sting by Dave Houston, Jamie Fakette,
Speaker 1: Brian Lester and Samuel Slater. They were used under a
Speaker 1: Creative Commons license, and thank you everyone for listening. Hey there,
Speaker 1: I'm Kyle Trigstad, Politics editor for Bloomberg Government, and I'm
Speaker 1: Greg Gurou, Senior Elections reporter for Bloomberg Government. Check out
Speaker 1: our podcast, down Ballot Counts. Each week, Greg and I
Speaker 1: will be breaking down all of those down ballot elections
Speaker 1: that make up the fight for the US Congress. Listen
Speaker 1: and subscribe to Downballot Counts from Bloomberg Government wherever you
Speaker 1: get your podcasts.