Dear Editor,
I know we are in the age of press freedom but crass ignorance should be exempt.
The “concerned daughter”, as stated in her letter to the editor on Tuesday, January 19, 2016, rebuffed the efforts of the Government to encourage householders to practice source reduction and hence reduce the population of the vector of the Zika and other viruses.
Aedes aegypti is a container breeder. There are some 60 species of mosquitoes in Jamaica and common sense suggests that all species could not breed in the same kind of aquatic environment. Basic ecology therefore suggests that these species will partition their habitat and hence reduce (interspecific) competition.
The chance therefore of finding Aedes aegypti in gullies and drains is not zero but close to my chance of winning the $25-million Lotto. So why focus attention on these sites. There are other mosquitoes that breed in these areas and the bite is indistinguishable from Aedes aegypti. We have to focus on the vector species and not the nuisance species.
Source reduction is the cheapest and quite an effective way of reducing the transmission of the viruses. Something as simple as an empty side of a jelly coconut or malfunctioning refrigerator drip tray are known breeding sites for Aedes aegypti. Other common sites include pets’ water containers, flowerpot saucers, buckets, clogged cisterns, vases with freshly cut flowers in water, and even soft drink bottles left to collect water.
I also want to single out tyres. The only time a clean tyre has no mosquito larvae is if the water was only collected in the last 3-4 days. They might even contain first instar larvae (the larva that emerges when the egg hatches) which are not visible to the naked eye and especially against a black background. Tyres are, however, not a major breeding site in households thus special focus has to be placed on tyre dealers and repair shops.
So I seriously take your letter writer to task for undermining the Government’s effort and possibly aiding in the non-compliance among householders in reducing the vector population and ultimately the spread of these communicable diseases.
MM
I know we are in the age of press freedom but crass ignorance should be exempt.
The “concerned daughter”, as stated in her letter to the editor on Tuesday, January 19, 2016, rebuffed the efforts of the Government to encourage householders to practice source reduction and hence reduce the population of the vector of the Zika and other viruses.
Aedes aegypti is a container breeder. There are some 60 species of mosquitoes in Jamaica and common sense suggests that all species could not breed in the same kind of aquatic environment. Basic ecology therefore suggests that these species will partition their habitat and hence reduce (interspecific) competition.
The chance therefore of finding Aedes aegypti in gullies and drains is not zero but close to my chance of winning the $25-million Lotto. So why focus attention on these sites. There are other mosquitoes that breed in these areas and the bite is indistinguishable from Aedes aegypti. We have to focus on the vector species and not the nuisance species.
Source reduction is the cheapest and quite an effective way of reducing the transmission of the viruses. Something as simple as an empty side of a jelly coconut or malfunctioning refrigerator drip tray are known breeding sites for Aedes aegypti. Other common sites include pets’ water containers, flowerpot saucers, buckets, clogged cisterns, vases with freshly cut flowers in water, and even soft drink bottles left to collect water.
I also want to single out tyres. The only time a clean tyre has no mosquito larvae is if the water was only collected in the last 3-4 days. They might even contain first instar larvae (the larva that emerges when the egg hatches) which are not visible to the naked eye and especially against a black background. Tyres are, however, not a major breeding site in households thus special focus has to be placed on tyre dealers and repair shops.
So I seriously take your letter writer to task for undermining the Government’s effort and possibly aiding in the non-compliance among householders in reducing the vector population and ultimately the spread of these communicable diseases.
MM