OOC: Some problems I noticed.
Wiktionary wrote:Any organism or substance, especially a microorganism, capable of causing disease, such as bacteria, viruses, protozoa or fungi. Microorganisms are not considered to be pathogenic until they have reached a population size that is large enough to cause disease.
Since no definition of pathogen is given, going by the dictionary one. Notice "substance" there?
Honeydewistania wrote:"vector" as a
non-pathogen non-sapient non-endangered organism that can transmit pathogens into a sapient organism which can seriously harm said sapient organism;
Since
botulism is "an illness caused by a toxin produced by the bacterium
Clostridium botulinum", the toxin fits the dictionary definition of a pathogen and thus the bacterium would fit your definition of a vector, right? Except no.
Clostridium botulinum is "a diverse group of pathogenic bacteria" and causes the illness known as botulism via its toxic secretions. In RL there's not problem because both the bacterium and its toxin fit the definition of a pathogen. But lacking that definition here, the bacterium would be both a pathogen and a vector, yet a vector can't be a pathogen, so... the proposal doesn't apply to C. botulinum?
Fairly sure there was also some micro-organism that itself causes a disease (and is spread by an animal vector) that can additionally infect you with a virus or bacterium - I watched a documentary on parasites not long ago, but can't remember what it was - in which case you'd have another vector-and-pathogen N/A situation. And that's just RL.
Also, in RL at least every single land vertebrate livestock animal is a vector according to your definition.
But going back to the definition, notice the latter part of it?
"Microorganisms are not considered to be pathogenic until they have reached a population size that is large enough to cause disease." So a pathogenic micro-organism isn't one, unless there's enough of them. So as
at introduction of pathogen from the vector into the host the micro-organism number is usually too small to cause a disease and it's only the micro-organism in question breeding in the host that then causes the disease, most actual micro-organism pathogens (if
any, actually) would not
be pathogens (in RL they're "pathogenic") when they still reside in the vectors, and so the vectors wouldn't be vectors...
In other words, needs work, and likely the introduction of the definition of a pathogen. Relying on the RL dictionary definition of it is what's causing these problems. Livestock will remain vectors nevertheless.
"vector-borne disease" as a disease that is spread by vectors;
This is nonsense according to your definition of a vector, as the vectors themselves cannot be pathogenic. You're wanting to say the disease is one caused by pathogens spread by vectors.
"vector-infested area" as an area in which the population of vectors pose a significant threat to the health of sapient organisms inhabiting in close proximity to them as a result of vector-borne disease;
I get what you're wanting to say here, but you might want to reorganize it. And given your definition of a vector, why would you even need to have the "as a result of" ending there? It's already in the definition!
“genetically modified vector” as an organism that is released into vector populations to breed and produce offspring that are sterile or unable to transmit pathogens;
"...
as a genetically modified vector organism..." and "...
wild populations..."
Though why so
specific? Couldn't a modified vector be introduced that has a genetic aversion against parasitizing (thinking mosquitoes here) sapients? Then it wouldn't matter that they kept breeding or kept spreading the pathogen, if they didn't transmit it to sapients (as that's the point of your definition). I think you're too focused on the GMO malaria mosquitoes in RL here. No need to limit the multiverse with what some poxy little species does on a poxy little planet in an uninteresting middle-sized galaxy.
Tasks the World Assembly Science Program (WASP) with conducting and collating research
Make the member nations do the research. Do NOT reach for a committee right off the bat. Mandates for member nations first, give the nations as much to do as possible, ONLY use a committee if you must. ESPECIALLY the whole GMO vectors thing. You're currently giving nations no say ("cooperating with" doesn't equal "the nation can say no thanks") whether they even
WANT GMO mosquitoes being created in the first place, nevermind having them released into the wild. Maybe they've vaccinated their whole population and continue doing so as part of their regular vaccination program and thus the pathogen is no biggie? Don't shove your solution down everyone's throat with the might of the WA, rather give the member nations the task to figure out whether 1. some vector and its pathogen(s) are bad enough that something needs to be done about them, 2. if they want to go for GMO route to edit an entire species of wild creatures or if they'd prefer a vaccine for the pathogen, and 3. if they need the WA's help to do so. I mean, literally obviously creating GMO vectors is Modern Tech, since it's been done in RL, so it shouldn't be beyond reach for most WA nations. Only engage a committee (and look for something that works for WASP but isn't WASP itself, if possible) if the member nation asks for WA's help. And even then don't reach for the General Fund next.
Mandates that member nations provide as much knowledge as reasonably possible to the World Assembly pertaining to vectors that have previously caused, are currently causing or are at risk of causing an area to become a vector-infested area or on vector-borne diseases to assist in research;
...what? The language is weird. Plus you have definitions, use them! And I don't mean throwing all 3 defined terms into the same clause like you do here, I mean actually using them intelligently.
Requires that member nations create and promulgate understandable guidelines for people and businesses in vector-infested areas to reduce the breeding of vectors or the spread of vector-borne disease, based on information provided by WASP;
Arse-first up the tree again. See what I said before about whether vectors and their pathogens even are a problem anymore.
Strongly urges member nations to conduct any other necessary activities or enforce policies that will assist in reducing vector populations or the spread of vector-borne disease, in both vector-infested areas and non-infested areas;
Strongly urging vague fluff is no use for anyone. A reasonable nation would do such things anyway and would likely have already done so,
if the vectors and their pathogens were still a problem. I'm sure some Finnish mosquito species could technically spread some serious pathogens (there used to be endemic malaria here in the medieval period but I don't know if it was a mosquito species that has since been extirpated), but because they don't, currently, there's no need to - from the POV of the nation - do something so drastic as to start genetically modifying them.
Also how exactly are you going to reduce vector populations where there are no vectors (some of the non-infested areas are going to be non-infested due to the lack of said vectors entirely)? Why should I go out after rain and pour out any water collected in pots and pans outside like it was early May 1986 all over again, when the malaria micro-organisms simply don't live here?
(I don't like our mosquitoes - I actively loathe and hate them and would want all mosquitoes everywhere to vanish off the face of the Earth, but as long as their bite just is unpleasant and not actually dangerous, I'm not going to stress about them, nor are others.)