Human Life and the Environment: Is There a Balance?

Developments in technology have allowed humanity increasingly effective ways to combat diseases. These developments also come with controversy. As our understanding of disease has increased, certain moral questions have been raised. These questions ask: “To what extent does humanity have a duty to take care of the environment?” and “If this duty exists, how do we accomplish this goal?” These broad questions are almost impossible for us to answer. With the rise of the Zika virus, however, these moral questions are brought to the forefront again. Oxitec, a British biotechnology company, has come up with a controversial method of combating Zika involving the use of genetically engineered mosquitoes to combat the virus. The technique involves modifying captive mosquitoes with a gene that prevents their offspring from reaching adulthood. The company planned to release these modified mosquitoes in West Florida to mate with wild mosquitoes and drive down the mosquito population. While the inhabitants of West Florida passed a vote to allow the release, environmentalists have opposed this method. They claim that the release would reduce or eradicate the mosquito population. This article will argue that genetically modified mosquitoes should be used to combat Zika, and that the preservation of human life outweighs the potential environmental impact. It will do so by examining the positive and negative aspects of using genetically modified mosquitoes and by answering whether they should be used to combat Zika, not just in West Florida, but in other problematic areas as well. The legal ramifications of this issue are dependent on which governmental agency would regulate the genetically modified mosquitoes and the environmental impact of combatting Zika through genetically engineered mosquitos.