Most actions have a potential upside, and a potential downside. Some people are very good at envisioning about the rosy, positive consequences of an action, but not so good at identifying the possible negative outcomes.
Take scientists, for example.
In Brazil, disease-carrying mosquitoes are a huge problem. Authorities there are keenly interested in wiping out the pests that spread the Zika virus, dengue, and malaria, but the issue is how to do it in an environmentally safe way. Some scientists then came up with the idea of using gene-hacking techniques to tackle the problem. The scientists would modify the genes of a control group of male mosquitoes so that their offspring would immediately die, release the mosquitoes into the wild, and then watch as the mosquitoes mated and the mosquito population plummeted.
Unfortunately, it didn’t quite work out that way. Initially, the mosquito population did decline, but then it returned to its prior level. Puzzled scientists looked into what had happened, and discovered that the genetically modified control group had in fact mated with wild mosquitoes — but at least some of their offspring survived. What’s worse, the offspring carried genetic modifications that may make them even more resistant to future attempts to wipe them out. In short, the gene-hacking experiment may have produced a new strain of superbugs that are more robust than their predecessors.
One of the researchers who looked into the issue commented: “It is the unanticipated outcome that is concerning.” No kidding! We should all remember those words the next time somebody proposes messing with DNA and genetics and confidently assures us that their efforts will produce nothing but positive benefits. Just because somebody wears a white lab coat doesn’t make them infallible.