Home » Is killing mosquitos better than learning to live with malaria?

Is killing mosquitos better than learning to live with malaria?

by simon

Persada Health’s malaria initiative in the Papuan regency of Teluk Bintuni, West Papua was awarded a BP Helios Human Energy Award in 2006, and a UN Public Service Award in 2018. It was implemented by experts who worked with the Australian Royal Flying Doctors Service. The work resulted in the almost complete elimination of malaria prevalence in some very poor and remote villages where malaria is endemic. The prevalence of malaria was reduced from 12% to 0.08%.

The interesting thing is, they did this without killing mosquitos.

Persada’s plan involved recruiting and training village malaria workers, mostly women from affected villages, to diagnose malaria using a blood detection test and administer a complete treatment appropriate to the disease type identified. Complex treatments were simplified with the help of custom-designed packaging with medications pre-packaged to suit patients’ weight group and to show them which doses should be taken at which times. A range of marketing materials to raise awareness of the programme, and experts from the team visited each malaria worker regularly to support their progress.

Mosquito eradication is unlikely to ever be possible – without widespread use of insecticides, which have significant other impacts on biodiversity and environmental health. Mosquitos are important pollinators and their overall biomass and effect on animal populations indicates that they must be part of regulatory mechanisms in surrounding ecosystems. The greater problem lies in the indiscriminate use of pesticides. Traditionally DDT was used to control mosquitos and this bioaccumulating toxin is notorious for its impacts on other wildlife, including birds of prey. More recently DDT has been implicated in premature births in humans.

In Ecology: a world without mosquitos, author Janet Fang surmises that a world without mosquitos would be no different to the world we have now.

However, while entomologist Joe Conlon (American Mosquito Control Association, Jacksonville, Florida) says “they don’t occupy an unassailable niche in the environment,” he goes on to add “if we eradicated them tomorrow, the ecosystems where they are active will hiccup and then get on with life. Something better or worse would take over.”

Unsurprisingly, trying to predict biodiversity consequences of removal of an entire globally-abundant insect group is beyond the capacity of scientists. When we make decisions to remove entire trophic layers we are playing with systems we will never understand completely enough to know the consequence. Conlon’s last sentence says it all:

“… something better or worse would take over”.

If you remove an evolved clade of insects from the biosphere, you release free surplus energy. The “something” that takes over doesn’t have to be better or worse, it will be more chaotic.

From a human habitation perspective, having chaos is worse than stability, because unpredictable ecosystems lead to climate fluctuations and reduced food security. The question we should be asking is: are we better with the devil we know? Are we better to learn to live with mosquitos than introducing something new and possibly worse?

The work that Persada Health did in West Papua demonstrates that malaria can be effectively controlled using a social marketing method, as opposed to mosquito control. So why not invest in those methods instead?

patreon banner

You may also like

This website uses cookies to improve your experience. We'll assume you're ok with this, but you can opt-out if you wish. Accept Read More