Guess that's why Walter Reed has a hospital named after him.pinball1970 said:Historically when you remove them locally
https://www.insectweek.org/blog/mosquitoes-and-the-panama-canal/#:~:text=Of the tens of thousands,the disease gets its name).
pinball1970 said:Historically when you remove them locally
https://www.insectweek.org/blog/mos...e tens of thousands,the disease gets its name).
BillTre said:Guess that's why Walter Reed has a hospital named after him.
The workers and engineers still viewed miasma theory (‘bad air’), foul tropical soils, and direct contact with infected persons as the causes of the disease. This lack of knowledge of its entomological transmission route in fact resulted in many disastrous decisions facilitating the disease to spread[3]. For instance, hospital wards in which the afflicted were treated were routinely kept with wide open windows, meaning mosquitos were free to enter, feast upon infected inpatients, and disperse freely to blight the healthy. Even worse, potted plants brought in to improve aesthetics provided females with pools of standing water: a perfect habitat in which to lay their eggs. The French were effectively culturing the disease in the very rooms in which the sick were being treated!
It was US army physician Major Walter Reed who finally demonstrated unequivocally thatAedes aegypti was the vector of the virus, building on the ‘mosquito hypothesis’ proposed by Cuban scientist Carlos Finlay in 1881. This was achieved through an ethically questionable, but simple experiment[5]. A newly emerged A. aegypti mosquito was taken by Reed, allowed to feed on a suffering patient, and then transferred – voluntarily – to his friends and co-workers. When they became sick with Yellow Fever days later (but thankfully surviving) the breakthrough had been made[5]. The Americans now knew how to succeed where the French had failed.
It was US army physician Major Walter Reed who finally demonstrated unequivocally thatAedes aegypti was the vector of the virus, building on the ‘mosquito hypothesis’ proposed by Cuban scientist Carlos Finlay in 1881. This was achieved through an ethically questionable, but simple experiment[5]. A newly emerged A. aegypti mosquito was taken by Reed, allowed to feed on a suffering patient, and then transferred – voluntarily – to his friends and co-workers. When they became sick with Yellow Fever days later (but thankfully surviving) the breakthrough had been made[5]. The Americans now knew how to succeed where the French had failed.
No. I will catch the lizards and release them, and have an inspector find any holes in my garage. Plus lizards consume bugs which could be even worse. Let nature take its course.kyphysics said:We get these lizard things (not sure if it's a lizard or some close reptile cousin) hanging around the sides of house and inside the garage (never inside the actual home). They leave poop everywhere.
I've caught a bunch with sticky traps. They walk across it and get stuck on them. They starve to death and die and we throw them away. I told this to a neighbor and he said he leaves them alone, because they eat the annoying bugs around you - even termites (which we think we NOW HAVE - as I found what seems to be a mud tube and a freaking small bug with white-ish wings near it).
So, for him, it's an easy trade-off. Less bugs and possibly even termi te prevention vs. lizard poop (which he can just clean up like dog poop).
Same question holds for possums. They are clumsy, shy, and weird looking animals. Yet, they eat all the really bad bugs around the neighborhood. Run them off our property or let them "hang out" to kill the annoying bugs?
To be brutally honest I sometimes feel like this about humans I genuinely do not like (for whatever reasons, from pheromones to political and philosophical disagreements).DaveC426913 said:I struggle with this too.
I prefer to think that my compassion for lower animals isn't about their pain so much as it is about me unable to turn off my empathy (i.e. I am projecting).
Go with a rule: Treat them like you want us Off Worlders to treat youjack action said:Before killing an animal, you may want to refer to your local laws. Here's an example about squirrels in Ontario:
Go with a rule: Treat them like you want us Off Worlds's to treat you... Grin on that sweet....hehejack action said:Is it? This is assuming mosquitos are "evil" and play no other role than to kill humans. Very unlikely based on simple observations and errors committed in the past, trying to "correct" nature.
It is you who considers the low worth of mosquitos in comparison to humans. It is a dangerous path to take. How many people need to die from one life form for one to decide to eradicate that life form? If one values human life above all, isn't a single human death enough? Comparing one individual with another is one thing, comparing one life form over another is vastly different.
I thought the great lesson learned was that diversity rules and we all depend on each other, even beyond the animal kingdom.