I haven't looked into this at all, but the effect of eradication efforts (whether through gene drive or the traditional sterile insect technique) is that screwworm stop reproducing and cease to exist, not that they die anguishing deaths.

I'm in San Francisco this weekend and next week, if you're in the bay area want to meet, don't hesitate to reach out :) (both happy to meet 1-1 and at social events)

How big a deal is the congressional commission? What is the historical track record of Congress implementing the commission's top recommendation?

With hindsight, this comment from Jan Kulveit looks prescient.

I strongly upvoted this post because I'm extremely interested in seeing it get more attention and, hopefully, a potential rebuttal. I think this is extremely important to get to the bottom of!

At first glance your critiques seem pretty damning, but I would have to put a bunch of time into understanding ACE's evaluations first before I would be able to conclude whether I agree your critiques (I can spend a weekend day doing this and writing up my own thoughts in a new post if there is interest).

My expectation is that if I were to do this I would come out feeling less confident than you seem to be. I'm a bit concerned that you haven't made an attempt at explaining why ACE might have constructed their analyses this way.

But like I'm pretty confused too. It's hard to think of much justification for the choice of numbers in the 'Impact Potential Score' and deciding the impact of a book based on the average of all books doesn't seem like the best way to approach things?

Doesn't look like it

This is what my frontpage looks like

Naively, is there a case for using the average of the two?