Genetically Engineered Mosquitoes are Out and Biting - Episode 98

Listen to the Podcast:

Watch the Podcast:

In this week's episode...

Jeffrey Smith interviews Barry Wray on the latest news about the dangerous genetically engineered mosquitoes released in Florida...and planned for elsewhere in the US.

Learn more here:

The Institute for Responsible Technology is working to protect you & the World from GMOs (and while we’re at it, Roundup®...)  To find out exactly how we do this and to subscribe to our newsletter visit

Notes for this week's Podcast
This week's Transcript

Rough Transcript:

Speaker 2: (00:07)
Hello everyone. My name is Jeffrey Smith with the Institute for responsible technology. I'm with a man who I go to to give me the details on the absolutely crazy experiment on human life. That's occurring in the Florida keys. I'm talking about genetically engineered mosquitoes and my friend Barry Ray, who is, who runs the Florida keys, environmental coalition. Welcome Barry.

Speaker 3: (00:34)
Hi Jeffrey. Thank you for introducing it that way, because it is absolutely that it's an experiment on humans. Then we look at it with such disappointment. For one thing that we would have an internal group that is elected by the community and they forced this on us and most of the communities very upset over it or unhappy over it. It is physically a poorly poorly if scientifically at all investigated technology, it only has the information provided by the vendor who is profiting from it for analyzing this. And they've released it on this. I've never heard of any such thing. Well only take information from a vendor that's making money.

Speaker 2: (01:26)
It's kind of how captured regulatory agencies operate. And I have some examples of that around the world with the biotech industry. Um, what we're going to do is we're going to ask you why they created these mosquitoes and what are they supposed to do. And then we'll talk about what could go wrong, which is a long list and the what could go wrong. What could possibly go wrong with genetically engineered mosquitoes? We're going to talk about human health. We're going to talk about the environment. We're going to talk about other mosquitoes coming in and we're going to talk about woven into this discussion. Are the lies, not the subtle, you know, slight of hand by the biotech company. Oxitec, that's bringing it to us, but the hard fraud and lies that we have caught them with caught them red handed. But somehow they have Teflon because no one has anyone. And no one in charge in Florida is paying attention to the fact that this company has been lying to them over and over again.

Speaker 3: (02:30)
Well, let, let's start with just one thing. One of the things you said was what could possibly go wrong? And that's what people look at us, the media and others look at us. Well, what are you afraid of? It's not the right question. It is not how we decide responsible science. We decide responsible science based upon what we investigate and what those results portend and what it suggests we should do as responsible citizens that understand science. So I go back to where we should have started the standard, which is the precautionary principle that says we will prove it's safe, or we will understand the risk in great detail. So we can look at them mathematically and determine if there are systems that allow us to mitigate that responsibly. One of those, and I'm going to give you a great example and I don't want to get too far into this, but I want to make my point here is that one of the great things they're skipping is this is a gene drive system.

Speaker 3: (03:35)
They can equivocate well, but it's only partly Mandela in it. They'll do all this hand-waving and confuse everybody. And it's irrelevant. Gene drive by definition is that you've modified the genetic traits that will be handed down in heredity to the next generations period. No matter whether you did it halfway, or you get it fully a year and everybody gets it, it doesn't matter. You have no control of that evolutionary process. Once you release it into the wild. So normally what happens and what the world health organization has recommended and stands on this still to this day is page trials. Before you do a wild release, just seems like kind of a sensible thing. Doesn't cost us really that much money. It doesn't cost us that much time. Remember we've been stopping them from doing this for almost 11 years now. And you know, I sit there and look at it and go, why would you ever allow that step to be omitted when it could catch so many problems?

Speaker 3: (04:36)
One of the things that we know about Oxitec is past is when they did a code cage trial of one of their predecessor mosquitoes before the [inaudible], uh, was basically a failed. And it didn't fail because of something deleterious that all my God look at this three headed monster, it came up, it failed because it was an effective because the females, the wild females were able to discriminate rather quickly. Well, as a manufacturer of a product, what you want to know that you have a weakness like that. So you can go back and improve it. So there's benefit to both sides. Ours is not a fight against genetic modification or genetic engineering. Ours is a fight against the irresponsible vetting of it and the irresponsible use of it. And then forcing that down people's throats, without them having an alternative a means to opt out, to protect themselves. So we're subject, no matter what. So this experiment, because they go everywhere. This company just seems to ignore all the normal for him. There's that, that even the most basic people would look at, it's not in their benefit. Let's catch

Speaker 2: (05:44)
People up better because people are saying, well, why are they releasing that? Have they released it? Where are they releasing it? So 144,000 mosquitoes. Is that what the number that's been released so far?

Speaker 3: (05:56)
Well, that's this trial is supposed to be, we will never know. We will never know how many mosquitoes get released. We will never know how many get caught. We will never know if there was a female born. We will never, or there was millions of females that are actually coming out of this. We will never know the truth because Oxy texts, contracts and their non-disclosures that are required by all workers that are participating in the project are absolute and Oxitec has 100% control over all information. Even the EPA will never know,

Speaker 2: (06:28)
But let's, let's catch people up as to why they're genetically engineered.

Speaker 3: (06:32)
Let's go there. All right. So let's talk about the speed of the most dangerous animal on the planet is the eighties, Egypt died, mosquito, Barnard. It kills that it causes more disease and everything that any other mosquito then next is probably the, uh, you know, we go to malaria. And so we're looking at the, uh, monopolies mosquitoes, and there's several anomalies mosquitoes that cause these problems. So

Speaker 2: (07:01)
How does he, how does the, the brand, or the type of mosquito called the alias gypped die? How does it kill all of these people?

Speaker 3: (07:11)
Well, because, um, it, isn't just pulling, sometimes it's a sequence of killing. Like you get a thing called breakbone fever or den gay, and then gay the first mine, you may have a small cold, or you may feel like you have breakbone fever and it's painful. It's conveyed. Well, the next time it could be lethal. There's four different serotypes of then get. And, you know, as you get other serotypes, you become more vulnerable to the, uh, symptoms that are created when you get those infections. And some of them can be lethal. So

Speaker 2: (07:44)
There's more deaths from den gay than malaria.

Speaker 3: (07:49)
Good question. I think that there are, there's more damage from going again. When I say the most dangerous mosquito in the world, it is affected people's health. And sometimes that can be, it can bleed detriments that last year, entire life, after you get that, I have friends of mine that had them gay back in 2009, 2010, they still feel the repercussions of it. So it's most dangerous. It carries yellow fever. It carries west Nile virus. It can carry Eastern equine encephalitis that can, which, you know, that's brain damage rather quickly. And it can carry all these other lethal diseases and it's proliferating quicker than any other mosquito. And as our climate changes, it's allowing a deal further and further north where those venues are less adept at being able to deal with tropical diseases like this, or, or understand unless they can get justice practices, everybody else, but it's a learning curve.

Speaker 3: (08:49)
And it's the, you know, there's a large swath of the United States that is really in that band that hasn't been hit yet with these eighties, Egypt diet in large masses. So we're what I say the most dangerous, if it has to, it's not just that, Hey, who killed more this year? It's not quite like that. I do believe the monopolies is a very, very concerning mosquito. And there, there are many different programs working to try and solve that problem as well. But we have, we have other solutions. Let's go back to the Egypt, just a second,

Speaker 2: (09:23)
Just a second. I want to catch people up. Okay. So we understand that the mosquito Kerry is a vector for disease and that there are ways to deal with that. You can reduce the population of the mosquito, or you can disable the ability of the mosquito to carry the disease. Um, and so there are other methods and at the Institute for responsible technology, we commissioned a big report to be put on, on a website, you know, have that, that report on your website, on mobile Nakia, which is a, uh, a method that has worked. People describe it as miraculous. It's not genetic engineering. It's amazing. We're not going to go too much into that. Now we can give the website information, uh, later as to, or why don't you give the website now is where people can go to read all about everything.

Speaker 3: (10:18)
What stop is where we've created a, a local, uh, you know, database, if you will, for different articles, different things, you can do initiatives and trying to help people understand what they can do because you, everybody needs to understand this watching this. This is not about the Florida case. Yes, that's where this experiment's being done. But trust me, this is about agriculture. This is about other, the other venues for the Speedos, but this is about a, uh, an industry, a biopharma pharmaceutical industry, or by biotech industry, rather trying to build itself. And it's trying to get the market. It's all about getting to that profit. And they want to go everywhere. They have dozens of species they've already been working on for agriculture. So by what they did, and we'll go into what they've done and why we're hyper concerned of what's happening here with our regulatory agencies is they've lowered the bar.

Speaker 3: (11:19)
And by lowering the bar, there'll be less scrutiny for every species that comes later. There'll be other companies that come in that may be less responsible than Oxy tech is. Even though we have clear indication that Oxitec has no, uh, cognizance, no actual, you know, conscience when it comes to the collateral damage that they can cause they don't care. That's our book. And you know, let's talk about how we deal with mosquitoes. Now we have a few different methods. All right, we can choose one. We have traditional chemicals, which what happens is mosquitoes very adept and they become immune to these mosquitoes are resistant to them rather, uh, rather quickly to the chemicals that they're going to spray on them. And so they can time to survive. Well, that's everybody probably remembers DDT. And the outfall of that was that yeah, it killed them. And they went through this whole world.

Speaker 3: (12:12)
We're going to eradicate every Aiden's Egypt out of the schema. That was what this was about. And they just went at it wholeheartedly and guess what they did, they all got almost all of them. And then now they've all rebounded. And they had to stop eating tea because they figured out how detrimental it was to the rest of our planet. We were going to have no birds. You don't need bird studio. So this is the whole thing, collateral damage from these industries. They don't care until, Hey, look, there's a glowing problem over here. Oh, how about that? Now the other ways we abate mosquitoes, which are best method is to be responsible as humans. And that means since these mosquitoes primarily live around humans, they can breed a bottle caps. They can bring breed and trash on the side of the road. We need to do a really good job of not allowing those breeding sites to survive.

Speaker 3: (13:03)
We want to go dump those, the water w w your, your gutters. One of them can back flow a little. Well, that creates a puddle that stays there. Guess what I found out in my own house that somebody had put in a gutter that back flowed, and that's where all my mosquito problems were coming from. When I discovered it, I started putting in this bacteria called BTI. Guess what? All my mosquitoes went away, natural bacteria, that the mosquito larvae eaten the council. Oh, darn. So we have natural methods that are herbals to humans. You mentioned one Wolbachia. We'll talk a little bit about that technology in a minute or two, but, uh, you know, so we have some emerging tech, like Wolbachia, like genetically modified mosquitoes that we disagree with because of the rigors that they've allowed the science to independent science and, and, uh, investigations to really, um, you know, proceed with, and that this technology responsibility responsibly, and we have a new, a new title called irradiated, uh, insects, which other successes on irradiated insects.

Speaker 3: (14:10)
We have no screw worms in the United States. And that's been around, that's a 50 year success from irradiating insects. And they have become stair on them that when they release them, it suppresses the population. So this new technology, both the genetically modifying the speeders and Wolbachia they're based on releasing a male only species or a male only, uh, portions of the species. And then when they go mate with the females, supposedly they're sterile now in, in the case of Wolbachia, they're sterilized by what we call in compatibility. Yes. Plasmic in compatibility. So zero offspring survive. That's all natural. The bacterias can't live in your body because you're too warm for them. So it's it. There's been just years, tens of years, hundreds of years of studies of our pockets. That's harmless to habits that that's simple. But the, when you look at nothing's like a radiated insects, they're sterile because they've been radiated and genetic engineering, genetic engineered mosquitoes, they're sterile because they've designed in aging splice that makes them sterile and they can't have any offspring that survive.

Speaker 3: (15:27)
That's ideal. The problem with genetic engineering is it's never perfect yet. They're working towards getting more perfect. So when you do this and it's with the germline, the part that we're talking about, uh, create the chromosome that created heredity in some subsequent generations. Well, you are apt to create more off target mutations when you're not precise. Uh, there's a lot of things that we don't understand yet about genetic engineering, but what I, I'm an engineer. I have a master's of science in electrical engineering. I know what the hell do I know about mosquitoes, right? So I've been doing this for nine years and I have taught myself a lot of things by reading and reading and reading, and by talking with others. And the bottom line is these technologies are not well understood, but people become confident in their skills will push them upon you suggesting that, oh, we know all this already. And it gives you an ugly. I want to give you an example that you're not confident in their knowledge. They want to give you an example of that because when you're humble and you ask questions, you do better with your science. And this isn't a group that was used to do. So

Speaker 2: (16:51)
I want to give you an example of exactly what you said with Oxitec. That happened to me personally. So, um, so I was, um, testifying at the, uh, Florida keys, mosquito control board. I know 2014. I forget exactly when. And, um, one of their scientists, Derek Nimo was testifying in favor of the release of the mosquitoes and in the lobby outside of the, of the board room, I said to him, first of all, you know, there's a, some small survival rate. It's not perfect. You're going to have some survive. Like it was, they was expecting 3% normal survive and up to 18% in the presence of tetracycline. And I said, you are now, you are gambling with the genome of the mosquito for all future generations. Because if you introduce the genetically engineered variety, you might end up changing the gene pool. And he said, no way, not possible.

Speaker 2: (17:58)
So few survive, they will just disappear. As soon as we stop releasing them, they will be gone. I said, that's. I told him that was naive and dangerous thinking. And unfortunately I was right because research done research done in Brazil showed that even three years later, after their release up to 60% of the samples found that there was genetic contamination from the released Oxitec mosquitoes that he promised up and down would never do this. And it became a permanent part of the gene pool. Meaning according to the author of the study, those unnatural genetically altered hybrids might actually be more dangerous than the original. They may be harder to kill. They may carry more disease. We don't know no one has ever anticipated them or tested them, but they're out there forever. But that, wasn't the only thing that Derek Nimo and I discussed. I said, Derek, have you, he tried to say, you know, the company said, no biting females are released.

Speaker 2: (19:01)
Just the non biting nails are released. Well, we all know that's not true. They're sorting mechanism or ended up releasing millions of the biting. And then the offspring that can survive could obviously be females and they can bite. So it was a complete lie. But I said, okay, now that we know that some of your genetically engineered females will bite some humans, we know that the saliva from the mosquito gets into the blood of the humans. Have you tested the saliva of your genetically engineered mosquitoes? This is what they had already released millions in four, four countries. And he said, I love it. He said, we're just now doing research to see if the protein produced by their inserted. Gene is found in the saliva, meaning that it circulates inside the blood of humans. I'm thinking you're a little late Derek. But I said to him, Derek, the process of genetic engineering causes massive collateral damage. There was a study on human cells for cystic fibrosis, where they inserted a single gene. And up to 5% of the expressing genes changed their levels of expression. That means it could have new toxins or allergens that are carcinogens, which means that the saliva as a whole could be changed. So wouldn't it be a good, doesn't it make more sense to do the whole composition of the saliva to see if there's changes, rather than just looking for a single protein. I'll never forget his response. He said, good idea.

Speaker 3: (20:36)
But you know, this is again, Jeffrey, you know, and, and look, I, I knew Derek Nimmo very well. You know, I spent a lot of time with him over the years, usually defeating him in that we had live. And basically because he was forced to hold that mantra that, uh, started out with just a series of lies. We don't release me males all over offspring die. They can hybridize all this stuff. And, you know, I would show them in just a matter of a few minutes, you know, if he was allowed to go first in a debate that, well, he lied about this. Uh, Dr. Nimo, I mean, is this true? And this is what you deal with with the media is they, they want them day for PhD. Okay. He's a PhD. I'm a master's degree. And I guess I know so much less than him, but I look at it and I'm one of the first that pointed out to him.

Speaker 3: (21:33)
And I kept folding their chart up, making them read their chart. Their chart said that let's see, uh, almost 15% of your Ms. Feeders survived 45 days females. And underneath you wrote long enough for females to take two blood meals in late two clutches of eggs. I said, what is your definition of survival? All of our Oshman done. And this is a stoic and as stupid as it was. I mean, it's your chart? It's your data from your lab. You can't ignore it and say, you're doing valuable science. It's just wrong. And what Jeffrey Powell, I didn't know. Jeffrey Paul at the time I've met him on some zoom meetings we've had and everything he did that of his own volition. He saw the same things. You and I did. You can't have data like this and say it doesn't exist. And then believe you're actually a scientist anymore.

Speaker 3: (22:30)
Now you're a marketeer for your company. And that's what you are. And you just happen to have a degree somewhere laying on the side, but you're not doing science any longer. And that's the problem with these people. They, they, they have decided, Hey, uh, yeah, we're, we're, this was good for the world. We're going to save the planet. You're not going to save anything you're causing trouble because you won't listen to the rest of us that have some smarts. Doesn't mean I'm the most brilliant guy on the planet. And I'm smart enough to understand systems. My expertise is technically in systems. I don't believe any of those people have an expertise in systems because so many times they don't look at them. I have a question. We

Speaker 2: (23:10)
Talked about the danger of being bitten, which is up in the air. So

Speaker 3: (23:16)
Well into the beat, the depths that we really need to talk about there, you brought it out a little bit. The reality is their negligence to not test that bite. When you look, you have the ability to do clinical studies and you've refused to just like, they refuse to do any testing on any biotic resistance promotion. They're raising these animals in a atmosphere of tetracycline and they have to, or else none of the broodstock survive. Right? And that's how they all the mail, all the eggs. Well, the eggs they give us are both male and female. They don't separate those. So they don't know if there's females in there. They're just betting on that. Their feedback loop is so profound, so strong that when they hatch that the females without access to any tetracycline family of antibiotics, because I've got, we don't use tetracycline anymore.

Speaker 3: (24:08)
They use doxycycline. And they'd say, it's a family. And it's actually much, much more potent than tetracycline. But anyway, that aside, they, you, you can't sit there and look at this and ignore the fact that you have are using this. We showed you directly how these mosquitoes can promote that, that they actually do go well. They never touched the wall. Yes, they do. They stand in the water that you just had them in and they pick up bacteria. And if there's any antibiotic resistant bacteria that were handed down from the mother to the egg, which is very likely is normal, then it's going to be proliferated by the mosquitoes flying off because I got to carry it on their bodies coming out of that water. And they're going to bring it somewhere else. And the fact that you will not just do simple testing on it and understand the magnitude of it is negligent and irresponsible period.

Speaker 2: (25:05)
You know, the passing of, of the microbiome from mother to child is actually built into biology. It happens in humans. I mean, I don't know if you're aware, microbiota

Speaker 3: (25:15)
Gone when you're born as a baby.

Speaker 2: (25:17)
No, no. It gets actually the there's milk digesting bacteria that move into the birth canal to inoculate the baby. And then the baby, the baby gets inoculated from the mother. That's part of nature. And you're saying that they're, they're saying, oh, no, bacteria could pass from one generation to another. It's actually designed to in humans. And you would expect it to happen in many different kingdoms. Okay.

Speaker 3: (25:45)
The cheapest staff from the Florida keys medical center down here in key west, it pioneered this whole discussion. He flew to the Cain and he showed the reality. Uh, I wish he would have been able to get in the Skittles from there, but again, we're dealing with non-disclosures and legal issues, so they could not give out anything. But the fact that Oxy tech could have done this and tested and said, Hey, yeah, this is what we need to be concerned about it. That is the real point. All right, they continue to opt the skate, the things that look that appear negative for them, instead of saying, look, we need to understand it correctly because we're scientists just like you let's all understand it. And let's make sure that we can move forward responsibly. And we really should get into the discussion on how they got their experimental use permit approval this time, because this will scare everybody.

Speaker 2: (26:41)
Let's do that. I just want to that, um, just to be clear because genetic engineering has collateral damage and changes the way many genes express, then not only could the mosquito bite be more dangerous than ever before, but the mosquitoes could carry more diseases. They could be harder to kill. They could have other properties that we wouldn't ever discover in the safety assessments in the first generation, because what happens a lot with genetic engineering is there's a change in the genomic expression of the alteration in subsequent generations. So I was talking to a woman who was doing genetically engineered, uh, insects. And she said in her laboratory, the gene was stable for 200 generations. As soon as you put it out into a netted environment, it became silenced in eight generations, completely surprising her. So they're dealing with a leaky technology when they're not doing the research.

Speaker 3: (27:43)
Ah, here's the word leaky technology. So we worked with a group of scientists, uh, and you can look up some of the articles they've written, Jennifer Koosman, she's the head of genetic engineering and society at NC state university. Uh, it's co-chaired with a guy by the name of, I'm going to forget his name right now, but it'll come to you in a minute. But that aside he's the one that basically told me the story about the cage trials with Oxitec to see performed with Oxy. Got, so these four scientists that we're working with, they're all, uh, Fred Gould and, uh, the other Natalie Koffler from Harvard, who was a micro biologist. And then, uh, Holly tootin from, uh, university of Illinois. I think she'd shared pain, not our banner, uh, but it doesn't really matter. University of Illinois and she's a field, uh, viral etymologist right? So she goes out and collects ticks and mosquitoes and things like that. That's squarely in their field. Every one of them are supporters of occupants genetic engineering approach. Every one of them said, you should not be releasing this mosquito with the level of independent scientific investigation that has been afforded for this experiment,

Speaker 2: (28:58)
The favor of the technology. But they think that Oxitec

Speaker 3: (29:01)
Absolutely. And Fred Gould was the collaborator that worked on the cage trials that came out with the example why you don't bypass cage trials, just, he was doing a presentation for where I live the village of vital Marotta to try and educate them. So they understood that there were parallels. And here we are a scientist telling you that really should put up a defensive wall to tell them, no, we're not necessarily against your technology. We're against releasing it without understanding these things. And again, I go back to my first comment about, you know, the introduction is it's not about what can go wrong, or are you afraid of it's about, did you do the proper work to prove we can responsibly do this and keep people safe and the ecosystem safe while you're doing it? It has nothing to do with, we are not our group and I'm a scientist. All right. We are not afraid of genetic engineering. We're afraid of doing it when we're all nascent about the technology, including Oxitec tech, however, smartly think they are. It's nascent where genetic engineering is being used responsibly right now are places like you said, fibromyalgia, uh, sickle cell anemia. You know what it affects D the vaccine. I took it. I took the Mr. And a vaccine. You want to know why it doesn't affect my chromosomes? It's not my heredity. It is me. It's my choice. I can responsibly not Erin next person, Mary

Speaker 2: (30:35)
We're on Facebook. You start talking about that. They're going to, they're going to censor us just by their robots. Trust me. We're not going in that direction. We're going to come back to the mosquitoes.

Speaker 3: (30:46)
Yeah. I, I, I don't want to talk about, I don't want to talk about the word, so I agree with you, but I it's. The point being is that there is no fear. It's a fear of bad science. It's not a fear of the science that you're trying to investigate. It's doing it responsibly and understand. And by the

Speaker 2: (31:07)
Way, Barry, just, just for the record, I have to say this, having been involved in studying genetic engineering with scientists help and, and being guided through with reading, you know, umpteen papers and whatnot, and speaking around the world in 45 countries and speaking to the organizations and groups that actually approved GMOs for their country. I, I remember speaking to, uh, PM Bhargava, who was one of the top scientists in the world. And he was asked by the Supreme court to review the approval committee process for GMOs in India. And he was on the, on the committee for eight or nine months. And then he, I interviewed him. He said, you know, Jeffrey, no genetically engineered organism has ever been ever, ever been tested properly less than 10% of what should be required has been done, but it's been done by the company themselves. So it's basically dismissive.

Speaker 2: (32:05)
And he said that it's basically a facade. And he wrote a letter to the Supreme court, the prime minister, the health minister saying that, you know, they should shut down all GMOs and do the proper studies. So I just want to be clear. It is also possible. I remember talking to a professor, Jack Hidaman from New Zealand. He said, we have to understand that we may not have at this time, the ability to properly assess GMOs, given that they can change permanently the gene pool. And that even, even, even if you do the best available, which is far from what they do the best available state-of-the-art studies on the outcome of genetic engineering, we may not be able to justify its release in the environment because there are things that happen generations later. And since I spoke to Jack Hidaman, a peer reviewed study, came out from Christophe 10. They said, it showed that when you release genetically modified organisms, they often change in their expressions and traits in following generations and can, can then become more pervasive as a result. So it was, again, even if you have the best science at the time of the assessment, there's a lot of scientific, uh, understanding. And a lot of scientists say it still does not. It still does not meet the criteria, given the damage it can do in the environment anyway, back to you, Barry

Speaker 3: (33:34)
Three recent studies, all right. One of them, uh, Oxy is actually cited in the risk analysis that Oxitec spoon feeds to the EPA, right? Well, one of those, this one was, uh, 2020 and the lead author on the title is meats. And there, this is all from NC state. Believe it or not just coincidentally. And it says genetic variation and potential for resistance development to the T T a overexpression lethal system and insects. That is what Oxitec is doing. And the point being is the genetic variation is large and it has a lot to do with the microbiome. And there's another study that came out here in 2021. And it's about the microbiome of the mosquito and the vectorial capacity. And then the, and the, uh, you know, the fact that this microbiome affects that, that total capacity. And then there's a third study that talks about the dynamics of the microbiome across relatively similar venues in quotes proximity within the a hundred miles or 200 miles of each other.

Speaker 3: (34:45)
And so what you end up with is these mosquitoes that they produce, they say, oh, all the Austrian die. But yet the first study shows that there's this huge variation, just in very close proximity, mating with wild species, because the wild species, even though, oh, they're all the exact same species, but they all have different traits. Just like you, you look different than I do, right? We all have different traits, regardless of we're all human and we're all, you know, you and I are Caucasian. And, uh, we live in the United States and, uh, maybe we're from the same, you know, historical background that, that hurt. I we're Scottish, you know, and all this stuff. It, but it doesn't matter. It, the variety in just mosquitoes, which is a much more simple it'll species, there we are. It's so huge that these studies show that yes, the overexpression TTA will be affected.

Speaker 3: (35:48)
And it's very likely that females are going to be produced. And they, they took soundbites out of that one article, it was produced in April of 2020, the same month that the approval came out and they took soundbites out of that article out of context and misused them suggesting, oh, we've read that article, but you missed yours. The two things that you referenced and you ignore the premise of the whole article that you're overexpression TTA are TT, uh, you know, lethal gene process is probably gonna fail in the wild because of the variety of different outcomes you're going to get because of the breadth of the species performance. And it's exactly for what you said, all right, you do not get the same outcome. You do not have you think that, oh, they're all the same. They're not all the same. They're different in this neighborhood than they are in a neighborhood, 20 miles away. All right. And the old mosquitoes, they don't even know how far they're going to fly. These people know so little about their own product. It's absolutely amazing. It really is. It's

Speaker 2: (36:53)
Scary. It's really interesting that you're tight. You're touching on cutting edge stuff, things that were just reported this year and last year, and it brings up two different, um, areas that our listeners should be aware of the microbiome and epigenetics. Now we'll focus for a second on the microbiome. We're talking about mosquitoes that are vectors for disease. So they're carrying viruses, the viruses as part of the viral part of the microbiome. So if a, if a mosquito is more or less likely to carry a particular disease, it is very likely that the structure and shape of the microbiome of that insect can contribute to whether that mosquito or insect is going to be a vector. Now I'm not, I'm not an expert at this, but it's logical to assume since the microbiome is so critical for physiological function of all these different, uh, species, if you're changing the microbiome, it may have an impact.

Speaker 3: (38:00)
Let's talk about a direct example. We were talking about it earlier called Wolbachia. Okay. Wolbachia is used in two different methods. The first method that we were talking about is what's called cytoplasmic and compatibility. Whereas when I have a male that's infected with a particular strain of Lubbock here, and I have wild females that do not have that strain of Wolbachia and the male mates with the female, zero offspring survive. It's absolute. That's how it works. You have another way to use Wolbachia. And that way is that when both male, female, or if a female alone has the wall back here, um, she'll pass it along to all of her offspring. So eventually everybody has wall blocking, right? But that's what happens. So you have a way to use Wolbachia that actually prevents all of these. Arboviruses all these viruses I talked about before the encephalitis, the, uh, west Nile, uh, den gay chicken.

Speaker 3: (39:01)
Dunia Zika, they're, they're all a group we call arboviruses. And these are both viruses. They are prevented from reaching the salivary glands and the mosquitoes when they use a certain form of Labaki yet. Now there's about 3,500 different types of strains of Wolbachia in the world, but they found out that certain strains, Wolbachia, Wolbachia, microbiome, all right, when it's, the mosquitoes are infected with it, both male and female, guess what? Them females cannot pass these viruses. It's amazing. And guess what if we infected, uh, you know, if, if it comes out that, all right, so now the females are in fact that the males are affected. Some other wild type female comes along and mates with a male. Well, guess what? Cytoplasmic and compatibility, all the offspring die. So that's natural suppression. So what ends up happening is it purifies the entire species where the females can no longer pass any of these diseases.

Speaker 3: (40:02)
It becomes moot because these are such a small percentage of the mosquitoes worldwide. They're not part of the pest population yet. They're not even that obnoxious now, even though they bite you during the day, and they're very stealthy, they, they turn and sneak up and bite you on your ankles. And then you'd slightest move that they fly two, three feet away. Right. You know, they're very docile, timid mosquitoes, and it's just how they behave. So now you're talking about a species that becomes rather benign because they don't pass any diseases. So why are we spraying for them?

Speaker 2: (40:38)
Yeah. There's only about 5% of the storing. There's like 5% of the

Speaker 3: (40:43)
Festival program. There is on the planet right now is the work that's being done by Scott O'Neil and Scott Ritchie out of, uh, um, the Australia. And they have just pioneered this work and done great, great, uh, promising work globally. And it is basically eradicated, den, gay and other arboviruses in certain venues where they've really worked on these tests. Uh, now you're seeing both China and Singapore, they fully embraced the cytoplasmic and compatibility, um, you know, techniques and they have large mosquito, uh, factories, if you will, that are building those release programs. Another company from the U S it's owned by Google alphabet, uh, or by alphabet is verily. And they've come out with high tech, not only to separate assure that it's only males that get released, but to actually map out how to effectively go disperse these mosquitoes. So they actually create the most profound and most efficient use of them to suppress mosquito populations.

Speaker 3: (41:53)
This is what technology is about. Not about coming out with a half-baked idea that you think you've spent enough money and you want to get to market, and I'm going to force it down your throat. And I'm going to go hire a politically connected lobbyists to scare the people that are working for a Scott Pruitt EPA, that you're going to lose your job. If I don't tell you, if you don't pass this, like I'm telling you to, and you look the other way and you save your job so that you can, and you pass this along as all those poor people, we're going to experiment on, on them. Oh well, but I saved my job. I'm a bureaucrat because you didn't do your job. That's why these mosquitoes are here. That's why the Florida keys are being subjected to this. That's why people can't opt out.

Speaker 3: (42:41)
That's why, no matter how much good science we show in front of them, they go, well, we need to see something new it. And we really don't like to see that. We'd like to get rid of it. If you can show us something new we'll, we'll, we'll pull the experimental use permit and they still haven't done it. And these are direct conversations I had. And I'll name names. If you want me to name names at the EPA and Mussina and Richard Keigwin, I am not fans of yours. You had a job to do. And I watched people fall on their sword, protecting this country when they had to get up and testify in front of Congress. And you protected your job instead of doing your job. And that is why people in my community are put at risk, and my ecosystems are put at risk because of people like you that need to step down and go find something else to do,

Speaker 4: (43:33)

Speaker 2: (43:35)
Thank you, Barry. I think everyone feels your passion. I want to say, first of all, as we wrap up, thank you on behalf of everyone for investing nine years into this fight, I was there with you, you know, side by side, you've been

Speaker 3: (43:53)
Here a long Jeffrey and thank God we have a great team of people. You're, you're a part of it. You were here early on. We, we were so naive when all this started, all we knew is we didn't like the answers we got at the first Oxitec meeting community meeting. And it was shown Ks wide on closed circuit TV for the governance. And we didn't like the answers and people like you came up and said, look, I know something about this. Let me help. And you know, we've had a center for food. Safety has been a stalwart here and friends of her, and they're all, you know, friends of yours as well. There are people that we all help each other through these times, too, too. You know, we all work in different facets and have different priorities, but this is one issue that we have all pulled together on and people need to be aware of what's happened with our regulatory agencies.

Speaker 3: (44:50)
You know, I know I get a little impassioned because this is my home. And I, I simply want to defend it like everybody else does that wants to defend their home. That's what I love. It's the people I love. And, you know, to watch this happen and know that it was because of a political Hitman that came in there that had strong ties to the past administration. And not that the past administration was aware of what he was saying inside of the doors of the EPA. They were not. And he walked in and Scott Pruitt really had no clothes. What was going on. And you know, so things happened that were really bad. And this is, this is what happens when you don't have stability in certain areas of your government, you don't have standards. There is no standard for releasing genetically modified species. In the United States.

Speaker 3: (45:41)
We have no written regulatory standard. How are they doing this? This is seat of the pants. Crap. This is not science. And yet president Biden, listen, president Biden, please. You wrote a directive in January calling this type of regulatory abuse out saying we weren't going to allow to allow it to happen. You have 120 days to go out and find out where these problems are and let's get them fixed. Well, you have not come here. We've knocked on your door multiple times, sending emails and you're writing in your portal to get your attention. I've been on. God knows how many interviews, every single major news outlet, AP Reuters, everything has interviewed me. You have got to have seen this. Somebody has to have heard about this. Please follow your own directive that you want to restore trust in government through scientific integrity and come talk to us.

Speaker 3: (46:39)
We are the poster child for what's wrong. And we can tell you where the problems are from our own experience. And you need to come hear it out because those same people that did not fall on their sword. They are still there. And they owed that to the public. They had the, the, the gracious opportunity to fulfill a public role in our government as regulators. And they did not do it properly and they need to step down and we need this experimental use permit to be revoked and reevaluate it. And I'll say, throw it out the door, but reevaluate it properly and determine how we should go forward. It's not as a punishment to Oxitec I not a vindictive person. I believe that they need the feedback to make their science correct. And until it is, we're all unsafe.

Speaker 2: (47:35)
Thank you again, Barry. And this, this, for those who have been watching our Facebook lives and our interviews and listening to our podcasts, you will see and hear themes in this that you've heard before in competent science captured regulatory agencies in a inappropriate dismissal of possible long-term reactions and changes in the genome. We haven't even discussed the, and we're not going to go into it now. Cause we have to wrap up the fact that if we get rid of the eighties of gyp tie, then there may be tiger mosquitoes coming in that are more aggressive that can also carry some of these things. There's the, um, the possibility of, of other food chain. There's a lot of animals that eat mosquitoes and yet not sufficient research done on what might happen in upper-level in the food chain. We know for sure that certain genetically modified crops and combinations with chemicals do have that effect up the food chain.

Speaker 2: (48:33)
And yet it wasn't properly evaluated. When Oxitec tried to introduce an olive fly that was genetically engineered. They never considered what would happen if humans ate the olives, when the larva where there's in the olives, was it poisonous. And they realized, oh, they're asking too many questions in Europe. We'll just withdraw our applications. So, so it's, it's an example of you. You've been very articulate and very passionate. And it's like, at some point, Barry, maybe you and I could sit down and you could say what your experience was in terms of the mosquitoes. And then I can describe similar experiences in Brazil and China and India and whatnot, and how this is a repeating pattern. And you've been very generous with Oxitec perhaps more than I would be willing to be, because I think that they're, they're not just incompetent. It's not just incompetence that doesn't look at these things. They're actually covering up evidence that they have discovered and giving the wrong impression to get their products moving forward. So I don't

Speaker 3: (49:39)
Give them that's before we've seen this story before tobacco didn't cause cancer oxycodone, it's not addictive and genetically modified mosquitoes, no risk at all. Right.

Speaker 2: (49:56)
All right, everyone. So I would say if you're visiting the Florida keys, avoid getting a mosquito bit, getting a mosquito bite or avoid the Florida keys. Unfortunately I think because this can be a permanent change. It might have a long-term influence on the health and the tourism and the environment there. And hopefully we can stop it there because the next place they wanted to introduce it was near Houston and they want to introduce it around, around the world. So we support you. So stop G M M that's GMM, genetically modified mosquitoes, stop G M Read more, let them know you're listening. Thank you so much, Barry, for all that you're doing. And thank you all are incredible group down there in Florida. I listen to some of the meetings I've been in down there. I've given talks. You guys are amazing. You've mobilized. You've been doing this for years. We owe you a debt of gratitude.

Speaker 3: (50:53)
Thank you very much. And thank you for hosting this. Hopefully somebody will hear finally, president Biden, we're rooting for you. Come on, get us. They feed her.

Speaker 5: (51:13)
Thank you for listening to live healthy. Be well. Please subscribe to the podcast. Using whatever app you're listening to podcasts with, or go to live healthy, be to subscribe this podcast and inform you about health dangers, corporate and government corruption and ways we can protect ourselves, our families and our planet. I interview scientists, experts, authors, whistleblowers, and many people who have not shared their information with the world until now, please share the podcast with your friends. It will enlighten and may even save lives. CPT


Save this episode...