[Passed] Reducing Disease Vectors

[Honeydewistania]

“Consider ‘to a’ rather than ‘into a’ in clause 1a. This is only a minor change, which of course means that I have little other feedback to give, at this time - this looks to be a fairly solid draft.”

Thanks.

[Nekomimea]

OOC: I noticed this resolution in the proposals and talked with Tinfect about this, and i'm concerned that the definition of a vector is too broad and could mandate the culling of endangered species, or ecologically and/or economically important animals (say the culling of pigs in response to something like the swine flu)

[Imperium Anglorum]

I think the criticism above is probably not without merit; though, I would like to hear thoughts from others with a greater background in epidemiology than I. Zoonotic diseases spread by animal husbandry are substantial. See eg James C Scott, Against the Grain (2017) 103–4. Yet, the benefits of agriculture to modern society (though perhaps not for the early adopters) are clear in terms of specialisation and other productivity impacts. Reducing the breeding of vectors – the definition of which includes poultry and also the 'sixty-five [diseases shared between] with our much-studied and oldest domesticate, the dog [and humans]', ibid – would seem to include limitations on such activities. As to swine and avian flus, I am unsure as to how it would be possible to separate the human-animal interface from animal husbandry. See generally Michael Greger, 'The Human/Animal Interface: Emergence and Resurgence of Zoonotic Infectious Diseases' (2007) 33 Critical Rev in Microbiology 243.

[Honeydewistania]

OOC: I noticed this resolution in the proposals and talked with Tinfect about this, and i'm concerned that the definition of a vector is too broad and could mandate the culling of endangered species, or ecologically and/or economically important animals (say the culling of pigs in response to something like the swine flu)

The proposal doesn’t mandate culling, it mandates member nations promulgate effective guidelines to reduce vectors/disease. Member nations can put whatever guidelines they want so long as it’s effective.

[Bear Connors Paradiso]

Well this sure ended up being a genocidal proposal. Literally the eradication of species that may possibly be beneficial for the environment in ways that are not understood by "sapiens". And then gives any excuse to eradicate any other species for transmitting diseases such as rats (boubonic plauge), bats (corona) and cats (toxoplasmosis). Among other species such as deer/cows (prion/mad cow) and trunk people (STI's).

[Honeydewistania]

Well this sure ended up being a genocidal proposal. Literally the eradication of species that may possibly be beneficial for the environment in ways that are not understood by "sapiens". And then gives any excuse to eradicate any other species for transmitting diseases such as rats (boubonic plauge), bats (corona) and cats (toxoplasmosis). Among other species such as deer/cows (prion/mad cow) and trunk people (STI's).

There is no mandate to genocide any of them, the mandate that can be remotely construed as that is the requirement to create policies for people to reduce vectors or disease in an infested area. If there are so many cows that an area can be considered to be infested with them, and they cause a huge health hazard, it’s better to take action (which may not involve culling).

Also, as trunk people can legally consent to sex, they are sapient and it is illegal to cull/genocide them.

[Leiningerland]

There is no mandate to genocide any of them, the mandate that can be remotely construed as that is the requirement to create policies for people to reduce vectors or disease in an infested area. If there are so many cows that an area can be considered to be infested with them, and they cause a huge health hazard, it’s better to take action (which may not involve culling).

Disease vectors are also organisms in an ecosystem that occupy specific niches in food webs. Reducing or eliminating such vectors could cause food webs to collapse, causing irreparable damage to ecosystems.

[Honeydewistania]

There is no mandate to genocide any of them, the mandate that can be remotely construed as that is the requirement to create policies for people to reduce vectors or disease in an infested area. If there are so many cows that an area can be considered to be infested with them, and they cause a huge health hazard, it’s better to take action (which may not involve culling).

Disease vectors are also organisms in an ecosystem that occupy specific niches in food webs. Reducing or eliminating such vectors could cause food webs to collapse, causing irreparable damage to ecosystems.

If that’s the case for a vector, then governments can just adjust their policies accordingly. If fumigating mosquitoes destroys an ecosystem, just mandate that everyone sprays repellant instead. It’s not rocket science.

[Anisopterra]

The Commonwealth of Anisopterra agrees with the spirit of this proposal, but has concerns about the wording used. In clause 1a, a vector is defined as "as a non-sapient macro-organism that can transmit harmful pathogens to a sapient organism," and the rest of the resolution concerns itself with the sharing of information to help member states to eliminate/reduce these vectors and the diseases they could theoretically carry. However, under this definition of a vector, all non-sapient macro-organisms would be considered vectors. Are the member states of the world assembly ready to commit to studying the threat of every non-sapient species in their territories? As much as that level of diligence would greatly reduce the threat of new diseases, it's not realistically feasible.

We would support a rewrite that either limited the scope of potential vectors, or acted as a general agreement to share ongoing research on vector-transmitted diseases, without requiring nations to undertake the massive amount of new research mandated by clauses 2&1a.

However, we are currently voting against this resolution.

[Random Piece of Grass Two Grass Boogaloo]

this is just killing off species my dude

big no from me

,the gay crime skeleton

thank you

[North Saitama]

It is the concern of the Federal Republic of North Saitama that this resolution, even if it doesn't require it, could encourage member nations to engage in practises that could be ecologically harmful. Common vectors are often also vital parts of local food chains, and their extermination threatens the survival of predators of said vectors.

In addition, nations with non-human sentient species amongst their citizenry might have additional vectors, increasing the scope of what is a "vector".

[Leiningerland]

Disease vectors are also organisms in an ecosystem that occupy specific niches in food webs. Reducing or eliminating such vectors could cause food webs to collapse, causing irreparable damage to ecosystems.

If that’s the case for a vector, then governments can just adjust their policies accordingly. If fumigating mosquitoes destroys an ecosystem, just mandate that everyone sprays repellant instead. It’s not rocket science.

Indeed it's not rocket science, it's biology and ecology. And the proposal mandates research and reduction in vectors, not optional repellant. If the WA mandates anything that will harms the ecosystem, Leiningerland will comply nor support it, and anyone that understands the harm done to Europe's ecosystems by displacement of apex predators and destruction of forest habitats should vote against this as well.

[Theberstan]

Category: Health
AoE: Research

The World Assembly,

Recognising that numerous vector species, such as mosquitos, ticks and fleas, are vectors for deadly diseases such as malaria, dengue fever, bubonic plague and many others, and most of these diseases are difficult to cure or do not have working vaccines;

Concerned that the diseases vectors spread can imperil the health of those that inhabit in close proximity to these disease vectors;

Believing that reducing the populations of disease vectors is of utmost importance and in the interests of public health, hereby:

1. Defines:
   1. "vector" as a non-sapient macro-organism that can transmit harmful pathogens to a sapient organism;
   2. "vector-spread pathogen" as a microorganism that can cause a disease, and is spread by vectors;
   3. "vector-infested area" as an area wherein the population of vectors is likely to cause serious harm to sapient populations within that area via vector-spread pathogens;
2. Tasks member nations with effectively conducting and assembling research on vectors and vector-spread pathogens within their territory that is necessary to reducing the threats of said vectors and vector-spread pathogens to public health;
   1. Member nations that have successfully eliminated or are close to eliminating the threats of vectors to public health are exempt from this mandate, but are encouraged to assist other member nations in their research;
3. Tasks the Epidemic and Pandemic Alert and Response Centre with, upon request, providing medical information relating to vector-spread pathogens to member nations;
4. Mandates that member nations publicly release any information in their possession that could potentially reduce vector populations or the spread of vector-spread pathogens for free, with necessary redactions to protect privacy or national security;
5. Requires that member nations create and promulgate effective and understandable guidelines for people and businesses in vector-infested areas to reduce the breeding of vectors or the spread of vector-spread pathogens;
   1. Clarifies that only vectors or vector-spread pathogens that are the main cause(s) of designating an area as a vector-infested area are those that are to be targeted by this clause;
6. Urges member nations to further enact policies using the research obtained to reduce disease vectors;
7. Clarifies that this resolution does not discourage nor limit the usage of other legal and safe methods of reducing the threat of vectors.

Category: Health
AoE: Research

The World Assembly,

Recognising that numerous vector species, such as mosquitos, ticks and fleas, are vectors for deadly diseases such as malaria, dengue fever, bubonic plague and many others, and most of these diseases are currently incurable or do not have working vaccines;

Concerned that the diseases vectors spread can imperil the health of those that inhabit in close proximity to these disease vectors;

Believing that reducing the populations of disease vectors is of utmost importance and in the interests of public health, hereby:

1. Defines:
   1. "vector" as a non-sapient macro-organism that can transmit harmful pathogens into a sapient organism;
   2. "vector-spread pathogen" as a microorganism that can cause a disease, and is spread by vectors;
   3. "vector-infested area" as an area in which the population of vectors presents a significant threat to the health of sapient organisms;
   4. “genetically modified vector” as a genetically modified vector organism that is released into wild populations with the purpose of reducing these wild populations, such as to produce offspring that are sterile or unable to transmit pathogens;
2. Tasks member nations with conducting and collating research that can assist in reducing the threats of vectors and vector-borne diseases pose to public health;
3. Further tasks member nations with:
   1. researching into genetically modified vectors, and the effectiveness of their usage in targeted vector-infested areas and their vector populations;
   2. overseeing the breeding of these genetically modified vectors;
   3. overseeing the releasing genetically modified vectors into vector-infested areas,
   4. ensuring that following the above does not pose a significant negative impact to the environment or to other organisms except for the targeted organisms;
4. Permits the delegation of research duties to individuals or corporations, so long as doing so will not create problematic barriers towards the release important information to public health;
5. Tasks the World Assembly Science Program (WASP) with assisting member nations in the above if they lack the adequate resources to accomplish those tasks;
6. Tasks the World Health Authority with providing medical information relating to vector-borne disease to member nations;
7. Mandates that member nations provide as much knowledge as feasibly possible to the World Assembly pertaining to vectors that are likely or are known to cause public health hazards;
8. 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;
9. Clarifies that:
   1. member nations are not required to comply with Clauses 2, 3 and 6 if they have successfully eliminated or are close to eliminating the threats of vectors within their territory;
   2. member nations are not required to comply with Clauses 3b and 3c if the research from 3a states that genetically modified vectors will not be or are not useful in reducing vector populations;
   3. this resolution does not discourage nor limit the usage of legal and safe methods of reducing the threat of vectors.

You mean this Vector?

[Honeydewistania]

Yes

[Confederation of Weffle States]

All the examples are bull. Dengue Fever was defeated by a vaccine. Bubonic plague is long gone, due to antibiotics and modern sanitation. And malaria has a working pill to prevent infection. Ebola has not been deemed a large threat to humanity, and therefore has no vaccine, but we could certainly develop one. Cholera? sanitation and antibiotics took care of that one. Typhus? DDT is the answer (not to mention antibiotics). My point here is that this would do little to stop disease, while damaging already fragile ecosystems. Honeydewistania, a noble effort, but this is not the way to do it.

[Ardiveds]

Typhus? DDT is the answer (not to mention antibiotics).

OOC: Isn't this part of what the resolution hopes to achieve?

[Theberstan]

All the examples are bull. Dengue Fever was defeated by a vaccine. Bubonic plague is long gone, due to antibiotics and modern sanitation. And malaria has a working pill to prevent infection. Ebola has not been deemed a large threat to humanity, and therefore has no vaccine, but we could certainly develop one. Cholera? sanitation and antibiotics took care of that one. Typhus? DDT is the answer (not to mention antibiotics). My point here is that this would do little to stop disease, while damaging already fragile ecosystems. Honeydewistania, a noble effort, but this is not the way to do it.

We should definitely develop one. Because it’s going to be inevitable that diseases like ebola will become super bugs.

[Kenmoria]

If that’s the case for a vector, then governments can just adjust their policies accordingly. If fumigating mosquitoes destroys an ecosystem, just mandate that everyone sprays repellant instead. It’s not rocket science.

Indeed it's not rocket science, it's biology and ecology. And the proposal mandates research and reduction in vectors, not optional repellant. If the WA mandates anything that will harms the ecosystem, Leiningerland will comply nor support it, and anyone that understands the harm done to Europe's ecosystems by displacement of apex predators and destruction of forest habitats should vote against this as well.

(OOC: Clause 2 of this proposal mandates research into how to safely reduce vectors, and clause 4 mandates that this research is shared publicly. The only clause that mandates actual action to be taken is clause 5 which is localised already, so there might not be ecosystem wide effects, depending on how one interprets ‘area’.)

[JC Cavs]

I think this proposal is a great way to reduce the number of disease cases and could potentially limit the chance of an epidemic occurring. I fully support this.

[Eluney]

Herrera looks straight ahead and takes the microphone with his right hand - “This Delegation will support the Resolution at vote” - He quickly crushes a mosquito that landed on his right shoulder - “Reducing disease vectors should be taken as a matter of international public health, and we understand that this text is adequate to achieve that objective”.

Mr. Carlos Alejandro Herrera.
Permanent Representative of the Federal Republic of Eluney to the World Assembly.

[Honeydewistania]

Reducing Disease Vectors was passed 11,850 votes to 2,992.