STD Makes Crickets Mate Like Crazy
Highly contagious iridovirus also causes infertility, death
By Arden Dier, Newser Staff
Posted May 2, 2014 1:35 PM CDT

(Newser) – A newly discovered virus boosts the libido, encouraging those infected—that would be crickets, not humans—to have sex more often and with more partners. The highly contagious iridovirus transmits itself via close contact while mating, but not via insemination; it apparently passes from one's antennae to another's mouth. It also turns the insects' guts blue and kills them in weeks, NPR reports. Infected male crickets, identified in a new study, took just three minutes to begin the mating process when introduced to a female, as opposed to the normal 10 minutes. And females, who usually cut back on mating when sick, were just as geared up for a chirping good time.

It's not clear how the virus (which also sterilizes the crickets, the CBC reports) controls their behavior, researchers say, though it could influence hormone levels. It could also be that "when animals sense that they are very ill, they sometimes increase their reproductive output," says the study author. "Basically, because they are about to keel over, they might as well go for gold." So does this "cricket STD" relate to the human variety? Only in that the crickets showed none of the usual symptoms of illness, which is similar to how STDs operate in humans. (Click for another study about animals who "mate themselves to death.")

More From Newser
My Take on This Story
To report an error on this story,
notify our editors.
STD Makes Crickets Have More Sex is...
Show results without voting
You Might Like
Showing 3 of 20 comments
May 3, 2014 9:05 AM CDT
I've always thought the very idea of delivering a disease to another was a very eroctic thought and quit arousing.
May 2, 2014 3:02 PM CDT
Actually, there is a suspicious timeliness, which can also be referred to as a suspicious “coincidence”, of this article and one on NBC News. On the NBC site, they refer to the eliminating of a law in Iowa that punished individuals with HIV who knowingly infected others as sex offenders. Among other things, the law was described as too harsh, but, frankly, deliberately infecting someone with a debilitating or fatal disease, even if it takes awhile to finish its work, can be described as everything from criminal assault to homicide. They were actually letting offenders off easy. But quisling supporters of homosexuality as normal claimed things like that that law prevented people from even testing to find out if they had the disease since, then, they could be punished severely when they passed it to others. The new law allows them minor sentences for willfully and with full knowledge transmitting it to others. I replied to the article, among other things saying that the “argument” about people not getting themselves tested under the old law was like them having a gun that they didn't know was loaded or not and firing it at someone for fun. That is a depraved and sociopathic thing to do. That anyone would try to “justify” it is equally malignant. And, it appears, attempts to “justify” such behavior or move to have the penalty lessened seems rooted in an acceptance of a pernicious quality on the part of the offender, namely, that they had to do it. The downgrading of the penalties in Iowa appears to be in unspoken acknowledgement of a fact about homosexuals, namely, they will have sex with a person whether it can harm them or not! If a homosexual knew they were infected, or if they weren't sure, they could always abstain from sex or engage in masturbation to relive themselves, to avoid hurting others. If they cared about hurting others. The fact that such measures are being taken is an admission that homosexuals can't hold off from transmitting their disease through sex out of concern for others! Because, for homosexuals, it is a compulsion for mindless promiscuity. And, because they are so incapable of showing concern for others that they have to pass a law saying it's alright to infect someone with an incurable disease if you know you're contaminated, it's an admission that, for homosexuals, sex isn't about love or even sexual pleasure, it's out of anger, and rage and resentment and a desire to hurt. That's why I mentioned that anal sex with a man is so painful and physically damaging that no one would do it to someone they claim to love. It's also why I pointed out that, like sociopath murderers, homosexuals can't look their partners in the eye in sex. And this article seems curiously timed to attack the situation from the other direction, suggesting that homosexuals have mindless promiscuity that is so uncontrolled that it isn't even affected b the knowledge they might be harming someone else. It also suggests that they are so self destructive that they let themselves be contaminated through painful, sociopathically non communicative sex. And, such contempt for harming others does argue strongly for such things as child rape being an integral part of homosexuality, certainly many times more so than for heterosexuals.
May 2, 2014 2:50 PM CDT