Good Intentions and the Gates of Hell

I came across the article “Modified Mosquitoes Can Save Lives, Yet Face Opposition,” arguing for the manipulation of mosquito populations using gene drive technology in an effort to reduce malaria and other insect borne diseases.

My first reaction was that there is a serious unconcern for the ethical considerations related to the unintended consequences of unleashing genetically modified populations into the environment and the genocide of a species. But it got me to thinking how the same logic has been used before in history towards human populations too and how we need to guard against this kind of thinking happening again.

In the article, the author seems to blithely ignore the real potential problems with nothing but optimism and some vague consideration that government oversight will somehow save the day, despite the numerous cases where it has failed to do so and not considering that there aren’t enough laws yet that protect against it.

What is more concerning is how easily the arguments for using this kind of technology might jump from thinking we can genetically alter a species like a mosquito into reducing their population and preventing disease to potentially trying to solve problems like covid-19 that incorporate the same kind of thinking on human populations.

Gene drive technology can lead to potentially disastrous unintended consequences when we are just dealing with other species. The author appears to be suggesting that we shouldn’t be preventing new developments in technology from potentially saving lives, but it only superficially addresses the concerning problems that have already been caused by companies utilizing GMOs. Not to mention the many problems that technology itself has unleashed on the world which we now have to madly scramble to fix.

We shouldn’t need to worry about being concerned about programs that try to control human populations through manipulating human genetics or otherwise. However, history continues to teach us that even recently these ideas have been championed with terrible consequences. The most infamous of those programs being the Nazi eugenics programs, but more recently include the Chinese one child policy which is still effecting China and through it the world as a consequence.

There is a lot of debate about the ethics of creating and using genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and what impact they may have on our environment. Some of these ethical debates having centered especially around the company Monsanto, often considered the poster child of an “evil corporation.” So it was somewhat concerning that Microsoft founder Bill Gates controversially acquired 500,000 shares of the company.

Normally no one would think too far about a billionaire buying shares in a large corporation, however there are some who have suggested that there is an interesting Gates family background relating to eugenics which has to do with Bill’s father and planned parenthood.

This is a real concern when it has been argued that the reason and motivation behind the recent divorce between Bill and his wife Melinda was directly related to the relationship between Bill Gates and Jeffrey Epstein.

Bill gates has been shown to have questionable ethical and moral decision making in who he has chosen to engage with. Monsanto, a company implicated in numerous unethical behaviors regarding their main product (directly related to genetic manipulation). And Jeffrey Epstein a convicted sex criminal related to crimes against minors, with known connections to black mail and political manipulation, and a man with a belief in eugenics who funded a great deal of science research.

Should we be concerned that Bill Gates has been one of the biggest supporters of using experimental vaccinations and gene therapies including the support of a company releasing gene drive technologies through mosquito’s before in Florida? Does he have his own vision of better living through eugenics?

His support of the experimental use of mRNA therapies even when he has direct financial ties to Pfizer and other big pharmaceutical companies during the Covid-19 crisis is at the least a conflict of interest and potentially suggests darker intentions such as serious corruption in his dealings during the current pandemic, as his foundation is the second-largest funder after the USA, which provides 9.8% of the WHO’s funds…

The cobra effect is a law of unintended consequences that shows when we try to control and manipulate nature to fit our ideas of how things should be it usually leads to major problems. With new questions emerging behind covid-19 being a genetically modified virus rather than a natural one, I think it’s time we start having serious discussions about whether we are allowing history to repeat and how we need to balance our hubris in our limited scientific knowledge related to genetic manipulation and the people that are leading our experts in these fields.

“Follow the Science” has become a popular slogan in the media and I have heard it repeated over the last year with people who have very little understanding of the actual science and who often ignore the science that doesn’t fit the right narrative.

Science doesn’t tell us what is right or wrong, or how we should use it. We should be following our values and having a discussion on what are the real responsible ethical considerations for how we should be engaging with our science, not listening to people who have been shown to have serious ethical failings with questionable motives relating to political slogans like build back better and the great reset.

Ethical consideration shouldn’t be just in regards to our own human populations but also regarding all other species regardless of their inconvenience to us. Too often political or business interests adopt the superficial veneer of science as a manipulative tool for their own agendas. But any organization that happily suggests the possible extinction or genocide of an entire species for our convenience has started down a dangerous road of “good intentions.” Beware of where those good intentions may lead…