>>It can be argued that we've already made all the easy "wins" against disease, and that we're barely keeping the lid on superbugs, whether microbial or otherwise. Maintaining this state of affairs will take increasing effort. If an uncontrolled outbreak or pandemic occurred in the developed world, it would have an effect on the global economy and worldwide standard of living second only to a major asteroid strike.
>
>There was a trick used by Italian vintners back in the 60s - they'd install a bait for the particular insect in a field of x-rays or something, that sterilized the male ones. Thus spayed, they'd still compete with the fertile guys, and would mark a certain number of females as inseminated - yet no offspring would hatch. Within a single season, the insect population dwindled to near extinction. The tourists would bring new ones from time to time, and those were easily kept in low numbers, applying the same technique.
>
>Now if this was a known trick in the 60s, what's stopping the scientists from reinventing it? The NIH syndrome?

It's been around for a long time: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sterile_insect_technique

And AFAIK, the National Institutes of Health was not involved < g >