The parallelisms with software is that even in the presence of test things could go horribly wrong. Roughly I can say it describes how genetic modified mosquitoes could have caused the microcephaly issue. This hypothesis could be tested and proven. If what is asserted here is true this quote is really worrisome :
> it is potentially the most hazardous genetically modified organism (GMO) to have been created, and should go no further from the laboratory.
It's funny how they can confidently exclude that as a reason, when not even a direct link between the virus and the increased cases of microcephaly has been shown.
The proposed mechanism involving transposons in GM mosquitoes is very convoluted (imo highly unlikely). It is also a red herring, the real question is whether the virus is the cause, and what the mechanism is.
Having testable hypotheses is a good thing, but, e.g., the moon is made of cheese is also a testable hypothesis, and one that doesn't require a huge amount of scholarship to debunk.
Similarly, this mechanism really doesn't make much sense, nor does it take a lot of scholarship to debunk. Zika is a relatively small single stranded positive sense RNA virus of around 11kbp, the piggyBac transposon system is from a much larger DNA virus and is ~2.4kbp in some of the so called 'minimal' implementations... if it were there, through some convoluted, ridiculous way (multiple runs of DNA being transcripted into RNA that some how managed to arrange themselves correctly on the virus's RNA that, when incorporated into a host cell, the transposon could then be encoded back into DNA and written into the host's genome?), it'd stick out like a sore thumb and be immediately implicated by the scientists sequencing the virus. I'm not even sure it's readily possible to bring those two pieces of genetics together in the lab, let alone in nature.
that debunking looks and sound like a typical debunking of climate change, i.e. basic template of raising unfounded doubt, like no conclusive proof, it is just a theory, etc...
You call a decent debunking someone that's quoting what is everywhere else and against a redditor?
I'm quoting and citing Dr Mae Wan Ho with studies from 2001 and 2014 that precede all this "buzz" stuff and happening now. If you are not interested in the topic I posted, then you may feel comfortable posting to someone in reddit. I'm wondering how your mind could change if your kid grows with a less than half sized brain.
.. sure because random "theoh" says with no links to support the claim and under an "ad-feed" link of discoverymagazine "elegantly" 'debunking' a redditor. Are you serious??
A pesticide is a lot more likely the cause than mosquitos. Brazil permits the use of pesticides that have been banned in many countries [1]. The WHO has also said the link to Zika is very thin.
Yes let's string together some correlations to fit our narrative to further confuse and scare the public into believing that GM anything is the worst things since Hitler and then let's use some really old studies to try and prove newer studies and methods of eradication invalid /s
I'm shocked this is even on the front page. Even if you believe this to be true the "evidence" brought forth is atrociously bad. Might as well write up a blog post myself and claim something else caused it.
14 comments
[ 1.7 ms ] story [ 44.6 ms ] thread> it is potentially the most hazardous genetically modified organism (GMO) to have been created, and should go no further from the laboratory.
http://www.i-sis.org.uk/Beware_the_New_Breakthrough_Transgen...
I wonder what Bill Gates thinks about this.
Similarly, this mechanism really doesn't make much sense, nor does it take a lot of scholarship to debunk. Zika is a relatively small single stranded positive sense RNA virus of around 11kbp, the piggyBac transposon system is from a much larger DNA virus and is ~2.4kbp in some of the so called 'minimal' implementations... if it were there, through some convoluted, ridiculous way (multiple runs of DNA being transcripted into RNA that some how managed to arrange themselves correctly on the virus's RNA that, when incorporated into a host cell, the transposon could then be encoded back into DNA and written into the host's genome?), it'd stick out like a sore thumb and be immediately implicated by the scientists sequencing the virus. I'm not even sure it's readily possible to bring those two pieces of genetics together in the lab, let alone in nature.
I'm quoting and citing Dr Mae Wan Ho with studies from 2001 and 2014 that precede all this "buzz" stuff and happening now. If you are not interested in the topic I posted, then you may feel comfortable posting to someone in reddit. I'm wondering how your mind could change if your kid grows with a less than half sized brain.
[1] http://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/brazil-pe...
I'm shocked this is even on the front page. Even if you believe this to be true the "evidence" brought forth is atrociously bad. Might as well write up a blog post myself and claim something else caused it.