How can we exterminate mosquitoes?

This. Fuck this hostile planet.

Attached: file.png (968x709, 1.42M)

You're retarded you can absolutely exterminate this fucking vermin which literally kills hundreds of thousands of people every year and is one of the primary ways in which disease has been spread throughout history, causing many plagues even in dinosaurs.
smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/mosquitoes-kill-more-humans-human-murderers-do-180951272/
There are plently of insects in the ecosystem and plenty of insect eaters. We do not need them.
cnn.com/2016/02/05/health/zika-virus-kill-all-mosquitoes/index.html
>"The mosquito kills more people than any other animal on earth," Dr. Tom Frieden, director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, told CNN's Dr. Sanjay Gupta, this week. "Is there any redeeming feature? ... Well, they do provide food for birds and other insects, but I think the world would be a lot better off without them."
Scientist agree stop arguing on behalf of parasites retard.

>letting kids swim in what was almost certainly red tide waters
Poor kid must have had a snowbird parent tell her it was fine. Everyone who lives here knows how to avoid flesh eating bacteria.

>kill off a major source of food for birds, frogs, fish, other bugs
>because 1% of 1% of the population might be susceptible to death by mosquito germ

Yeah naw I'm not a tree hugging hippy but sometimes the answer is let it be.

why are white people's immune system so weak?

This person wouldn't kill every tape worm in the world because he's afraid he might hurt his feelings

What evidence leads you to believe that is an overall trend?

Attached: Skeptical.jpg (259x270, 14K)

Just kill the species that are vectors for disease

I'd be more worried about ticks...

I suggest we ignite the atmosphere

>What evidence leads you to believe that is an overall trend?
see pic

Attached: 1564483117713.jpg (1024x683, 171K)

>major source of food for birds, frogs, fish, other bugs
Mosquitos are a very minor source of food for basically every species. The vast majority of annoying animals exist as an important part of the local ecological balance, but mosquitos (and koalas) don't.

How many of those things eat exclusively mosquitos? If you took it out, would it matter? Probably not, the bird will just eat a grass hopper or something, and a bat will do the same. Something else will up that niche at that level. Stuff like bees pollinating trees is what is important, or the fungi crucial to the whole cycle which we totally ignore.

>Something else will up that
will fill up that niche*

A single instance is not a cause. Any numbers to back it up?

Attached: Skeptical Stoat.jpg (960x615, 68K)

I say we do 'em both and be done with it.

Our immune systems are developed in accordance to the environment we thrive in.

Attached: 451.jpg (640x480, 72K)

Tape worms aren't a net contributor to the ecosystem.
Still a resource natural wildlife uses.
We simply don't have enough fine data to say how much of an impact killing all mosquitoes will have.
>something else will fill the niche
Of nearly-parasitic carnivorous disease carriers, definitely. Since we don't know what will come along and proliferate, nor how dangerous the next thing might be, dealing with a well researched known enemy is simply the best choice.

Boohoo about Malaria in Africa somewhere else. Mosquitoes don't kill in large enough numbers to matter in any developed world.

neets shall inherit the world

>his blood
>his
All bloodsucking mosquitoes are female. The males don't suck blood. Everyone should read this new book btw, really good

Attached: books-the-mosquito-timothy-c-winegard.jpg (1600x1065, 199K)

>Still a resource natural wildlife uses
Not one that's all significant. Wiping out mosquitos would cause minor population adjustments, but overall no species would be significantly harmed by them being gone. On the other hand, the lives of many people would be saved.

Indian sewer workers are still able to get diseases/sickness

700-to-1

That's the ratio of mosquito infections to deaths across the world, the majority of which from Africa

Estimated 453,000 people in USA get mosquito-borne illnesses each year.
Not even controlling for better healthcare or anything at all, keeping that 700-to-1 the same and giving you the benefit of the doubt,

That's 647 people in the USA who die from mosquitoes every year.
Giving you the benefit of the doubt.

I don't think we need to do anything about it but mourn the unfortunate.

its not white people, its from not eating dirt as a kid

youtube.com/watch?v=rq2Os0X_77E

They're more than mildly inconvenient, which is enough for me.

>We simply don't have enough fine data to say how much of an impact killing all mosquitoes will have.
We have enough data to know they are a problem and we have actually totally exterminated mosquito populations before to deal with disease outbreaks.
>Mosquitoes don't kill in large enough numbers to matter in any developed world.
Wait until they start spreading neo-AIDs from somewhere in Calinfornia of course then we'll finally exterminate them and we'll ask ourselves why we hadn't done this earlier.

so me not washing the vegetables from 99 ranch is saving me?

yes, but you are probably also getting pesticides and such, If you need to lose any weight I reccomend fasting for 72 hours back to back and eating 1-2 pounds of steak and 200 grams a liver at each refeed, vegetables have anti-nutrients and oxalates and the vitamins are mostly actually precursors to vitamins the body has a hard time converting, see the effects of a vegan diet

if you dont have weight to lose, eat a hair above maintenance using OMAD and dont eat at all on one day of the week, like a tuesday or somethinbg

Again, we don't know what's going to happen if all mosquitoes are killed off.

This is really a question of future risk assessment based on unknown variables.
You don't know if the situation will get better or worse when a new species moves in.
It's highly logical to assume that mosquitoes are beating out a much more dangerous creature, rather than assume that some benign species will fill the void.

>starve yourself and then load up with heavy cholesterol proteins
This faggot wants you to have a heart attack.

>It's highly logical to assume that mosquitoes are beating out a much more dangerous creature
No it isn't. Go ahead and actually name a possible replacement for the mosquito that would actually be worse. If you say it hasn't been discovered yet I'm going to beat you with the entomology textbook you're skimming right now.

cholesterol is a precursor to vitamin D which most people are lacking, eat a cholesterol heavy meal and get some sun

The body will produce cholesterol if you do not consume -any-, because cholesterol (something like 45mg a day for a 5'10 160lb person) is necessary for the digestion process. It's literally a lubricant for the small intestine and is a health risk beyond that need.

You've told user to go into starvation metabolism and then shock his digestion with >600mg of cholesterol and other fats, plus a heavy protein load.
You're fucking stupid or you have malicious intent.

These are questions that nobody has an answer for. The safe bet, again, is "well it sucks for those 1 out of 540,000 people" (using the 700-to-1 ratio at 453K infections per 350m in a developed nation metric, USA population) and leave it be.

1 out of every 2 people is going to die from cancer.
Mosquitoes should be seen as somewhere dead fucking last on our list of worries.

Niggers keep misquitoes alive
change my mind

Mosquitos are pollinators.
Kill them all with a snap of the fingers and everything gets fucked.

Because he didn't.

>These are questions that nobody has an answer for.
Then it isn't highly logical, it's a wild guess. I'll offer an alternative thesis with exactly the same credentials. If we get rid of mosquitoes GDP growth will be at 5% for the next decade, Jesus will return to this earthly realm and sink Israel into the sea for their transgressions, and we're all getting laid.

1 human is more important than a million mosquitos
Fuck off, mosquito

he did, it's what kilt 'm

Bold claim. Hang out at a Social Security office for a couple days and tell me your thoughts.

>Social Security office
I said humans. Learn to read dumbass.

If your bar is already raised that high we should just kill off everyone taking benefits instead of the mosquitoes and see life get better for everyone else ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

>instead
No, we should kill both.

No, there is no reliable source on that.

>You've told user to go into starvation metabolism

starvation mode dosnt happen when fasting, it only happens with low calorie diets like

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minnesota_Starvation_Experiment
or
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Biggest_Loser_(American_TV_series)

I dont know how it works, but for some reason your metabolism dosnt take a huge dive when you go 0 calories, it slows while you're fasting, but it bounces right back.

Theres a Nephrologist in Toronto that deals with a lot of type 2 dietetics, that are in advance stages of diabetes cauz diabetes kills your liver. He initially tried to push the keto diet to reverse the diabetes, but he wasnt getting any compliance because lots of his patients were old and foreign and just couldnt understand the diet, he then thought of fasting and got his patients fasting, this was a concept the patients could grasp, like 95% of them reversed their diabetes and as a side effect they lost a ton of weight, if you want to search for this look up DR. Jason Fung

I am personally on the snakediet.com , its the most intense form of fasting, ive lost 50lbs in 3 months, and when Im my goal weight, I will switch to OMAD and a 48 hour fast once a week

Probably work but a little radical

>starvation mode doesn't happen when you don't eat for three days
Get the fuck out of here you little niglet.

>fasting
lmao

> dosnt know anything about fasting
>tries to argue anyways

did you forget wypippo accidentally smallpozzed the entirety of muttville

fasting is really only a useful tool for someone experiencing acute pancreatic inflammation
very low calorie diets on the other hand help cancer because slowing the metabolism slows the cancer.

>doesn't know
Is that right kiddo?

it's just a rumor for now but soon we'll hear

>fasting is really only a useful tool for someone experiencing acute pancreatic inflammation

its useful for more than that

>very low calorie diets on the other hand help cancer because slowing the metabolism slows the cancer.

fasting starves cancer out, and increases autophagy, a double whammo for trying to beat cance, except for the types of cancer that can feed off of ketones

>Is that right kiddo?
obviously

That's more a discussion of short-term versus long-term benefit. Consistent low-calorie is better than bursting the metabolism to maintain life.

And I did have a close uncle who suffered from cancer for over 14 years, in remission several times, never with chemo or medical help (aside from a college researching with him his own bodily decisions). So I do speak from at least some real authority over the metabolic effects on a cancer, rather than talking from health-discussion what-ifs or dubious ncbi pubmed free researches.

>fasting starves cancer out
Indeed. You still need to consume over a week an average level of minimal maintenance calories, and a close relative's long term experience with a literally uniquely-new-to-the-medical-world cancer showed that a consistent low calorie diet had better effect than stopping for 3 days at a time.

It's always healthier to maintain a consistency than force stops and starts. If you'd like to discuss this further you're going to get proven wrong.

If only there's a way to send the earth to another Ice Age that covers the entire planet in ice.

I would be cool with that.

Attached: RMPDQVBB6O.jpg (650x650, 67K)

Somebody post crawlspace user

>If you'd like to discuss this further you're going to get proven wrong.

idc, I love having my paradigm shifted, but you didnt give me much to argue with

>Consistent low-calorie is better than bursting the metabolism to maintain life

I dont even know what you mean by "bursting the metabolism " but low calorie diets will reduce your metabolism, plus almost no one can stick to them, they also harm people in a indirect way, because when they gain all the weight back people make comments and judgments like, "they didnt stick to the diet, what a fag"

>You still need to consume over a week an average level of minimal maintenance calories

whats this even mean? if its maintenance its maintenance, anyways if you have fat on you, you dont need to eat maintenance, your body will eat the fat, and a little bit of protein to fuel gluconeogenesis, but when you are fasting your HGH levels rise something like 3000% (I forget the actual number, but its high), so when you do refeed and get enough protein in, your body repairs everything it cannibalized

> and a close relative's long term experience with a literally uniquely-new-to-the-medical-world cancer showed that a consistent low calorie diet had better effect than stopping for 3 days at a time

how do you know this though? anyways if you have the fat on you you can go longer, there a guy on youtube who went 150 days, and Ive seen on reddit people going 41 days to beat Jesus, and I personally have gone a week, I only broke it out of boredom, wasnt even really hungry, but when you fast its amazing how much of the day is revolved around food and how much fun eating is

>It's always healthier to maintain a consistency than force stops and starts

not really, if you consistently force a low calorie diet, you will wreck your metabolism

plus fasting is in most religions, and for cave men living in cold climates probably didnt eat much in the winter, its not really a fad diet or anything, its been around forever

>I don't even know what you mean
Clearly.
>HGH levels
Almost completely useless hormone beyond the age of 22, which I remind you the majority population is older than. GH therapy in matured adults has shown no positive increase in any physical ability. It's literally, as the name implies, a "growth hormone", not a "increase physical ability beyond the stages of growth" hormone.
>how do you know this
10 years of my uncle and I staying in constant contact? Me being the only person besides his high-school friend (who I spent a lot of time with during and after his funeral) that he was open with?

>you can go longer
We're not talking about obese people trying to lose weight, user, the scope of this argument went levels beyond a small problem.

>not really
When we talk about the metabolic processes of the human system we consider the effects of chemical and hormonal tolerance and cellular reaction to the given levels of use. A "3 days off" and "1 day FULLY ON" approach to digestive+organ health is the furthest from ideal, respectively, to a moderated approach. You ask a man who's never run distance, to run ten miles, and force him to, and he's going to die. You ask your pancreas (and liver and kidneys and gall bladder and small/large intestines and heart and...) to go from no-input to fully-processing rage mode and you're going to enable more complications (much more cellular stress) than reduce them. It's akin to drug treatments for mental issues (the accepted goal is a slow build-up of dose, then consistency, then weaning), it's akin to developing T.2 diabetes by eating a whole cheesecake 3 times a week rather than having half a bag of MnMs a day, it's like trying to build muscle by overloading to the point of damage 2 days of the week versus steady moderate weight use 5 times instead.

What you -think- is correct is shocking the body to overreact to unprepared and/or unaccustomed stimuli. And this thinking is very wrong.
Shall we continue?

Larvae-eating birds, but we made them disappear and all we're left with are gulls and pigeons.

Gulls are pretty good at killing flies, though.

I always dreamed of becoming a human mosquito and sucking off the blood of hot guys from their veiny penises.

unfortunately the genetically modified mosquito experiment failed miserably
we're just total infants when it comes to gene editing

Microsoft already solved the problem using sound activated directional lasers

Give people a vaccination that makes their blood lethal to mozzies.

Why should we care? sterilize the planet for a single human life

What did we learn today.
Dont swim in places where swimming is forbidden.

500 mil people have died from mosquito bites because they transmit malaria

An actual blood moon that would lure them out of our planet. Put a nuke inside

I'll do you one further, it can't be the mosquito's blood either way.

There are way too much people without purposes anyway. People die. We can't create a safespace for literally everyone on this planet.

Legalize DDT

you cant. and you should not. you have any idea how it would upset the biologic balance all over the world? think before posting.

Same way russians did it in Sochi

Mosqitos are needed to population control.

Jews/Blacks/Indians?

youtu.be/hqKafI7Amd8
>15:30
/thread

Here's a few proven historically accurate ideas,

•Circumcise the Mosquito larva.
•Clamp the Mosquito larva upon hatching.
•Create degenerate Mosquito porn culture.
•Make Mosquito sex dolls.
•Drum up Black Fly vs Mosquito hate.
•Create Black Fly on Mosquito porn.
•Institute affirmative action for Black Flies to take over Mosquito jobs.
•Make up fake disease and aliments for natural functions then give the Mosquitoes medicine that creates more aliments and diseases.
•Introduce role reversal in the name of equality among the Mosquito population.
•Secretly introduce addictive recreational drugs into Mosquito neighborhoods.
•Gentrify ponds and waterways, forcing Mosquitoes to live in low cost housing in slum puddles.

Attached: The Great Outdoors.jpg (2000x1727, 2.5M)

Oh yeah, I remember this. Acnthamoeba Fowleri, was it?

Mate, they live in swimming pools, too. Or basically any relatively warm stagnant water. Also in solutions for contact lenses, look up acanthamoebic keratitis.

>koalas
I think they're an important aspect of the fight between eucalyptus trees and native forest are they not?

severely underrated

I wish we could do it again, they need it.

>the bird will just eat a grass hopper or something
>Yeah, nature will like, adapt and stuff. It'll all work out. Survival of the fittest, right?
reuters.com/article/us-science-birds/bird-numbers-plunge-in-u-s-and-canada-with-people-to-blame-idUSKBN1W42NA

Good. Anything that can kill a lot of people should remain. Until we have paternity licenses, and mandatory sterilizations and abortions for certain cases, we can't afford to do dumb shit like "curing cancer" and the likes. I like mosquitoes now.

FYI, hummingbirds eat a lot of mosquitoes. I grow hummingbird-attracting flowers and hang up hummingbird feeders in a bid to get more hummingbirds in my area. That coupled with ensuring there's no stagnating water, in the area, really helps keep the mosquito numbers down despite there being a few waterways. Prior to that effort, mosquitoes would eat you up in no time.

What would happen when pandas go extinct? I can't think of anything other than having more bamboo for ourselves. Why are people freaking over them so much?

twitter.com/HaggertyNews/status/621482436887736320

>Going outside

TOP KEK

Attached: CJ_y-4RWsAA0tQR.jpg (2448x3264, 832K)

Mosquitoes are only good for regulating the nigger population in Africa.
Getting rid of them in civilized country would definitely be a good thing though.

This would be bad because the mosquito population is growing at an alarming due to temperature rises across globe making everything into mosquito nest rate jackass.
citylab.com/environment/2019/03/mapping-global-spread-mosquitoes-climate-change-research/584197/