Tag Archives: sugar

Posts about Spartan Mosquito

Below are my posts that discuss Spartan Mosquito (AC2T, Inc.) of Hattiesburg, Mississippi.

I never intended to publish more than my original 2019 review, but AC2T’s retaliatory lawsuit against me (#2 on the above list) prevented me from visiting my mom while she was dying and has cost me $90,000 in legal fees (update: I countersued the company, successfully). I will continue to expose this company until it goes out of business.

Background

This television clip is a good introduction to the Spartan Mosquito Eradicator and to the company’s frontman, Jeremy Hirsch:

Are you a journalist?

There’s likely a fun story here. Owner of sandwich franchise becomes head of award-winning, $100 million company that sells tubes of sugar water to kill mosquitoes. Inventor says, “We’ve come up with the most economical, easiest, most effective mosquito-control measure pretty much in the world”.

When I pointed out that device is totally unlikely to work, company lashed out with a SLAPP to bankrupt and silence me. A lawyer in New York read my post and used it as the basis for a $5 million class action suit (but I won’t get a penny). Soon after, separate teams of scientists confirmed that, indeed, Spartan Mosquito Eradicators cannot and do not work. Shockingly, the FTC and EPA have done absolutely nothing, and even the American Mosquito Control Association cowered in silence, fearful of itself being sued. Only a handful of states have banned sales of the tubes.

And in 2020, Spartan Mosquito even managed to get a version of its tube approved by the EPA, a feat engineered by the lobbying firm behind Brexit. Scientists are horrified. You can now buy the tubes on Amazon, where they’re marketed as a beneficial pest-control insects. Only California sees the scam and bans sales.

Will the FTC ever get involved? Does the EPA know that it’s been snookered?

And how on earth did the tube get registered for sale in the first place, in Mississippi? Answer, political pressure (the Branch Director of the Pesticide Program wrote, “I was told from above to approve“).

If that’s not enough drama for a good read, there’s pornography and NASCAR in the mix (racy, eh?). And I’m guessing that Spartan Mosquito hired a private investigator to pry into my personal life (they posted online comments about my wife). I suspect there is also a lot of delicious information on the company’s failed effort to get a foothold in Africa (all that’s left is an archive of the shell company’s website). There’s even talk of a military discharge file with highly pertinent information. And talk of governors in multiple states intervening on behalf of the company, pressuring pesticide regulators.

There’s also plenty of footage of Spartan Mosquito on YouTube. There used to be more but the company has been deleting it. I can’t say I blame them.

Here’s the sole article that’s been written about Spartan Mosquito: “A Biologist, a Blog, and a Mosquito Control Dispute” by Brooke Borel and published in Undark Magazine.

Are you a state pesticide regulator?

Please consider contacting your counterparts in states that have denied registrations to Spartan Mosquito (CA, CT, ID, IN, KS, ME, MT, NE, NM, NY, OK, PA, UT, VA, WA, and DC) and ask for a copy of the letter sent to the company detailing the reason. You can also ask the Region 4 EPA office for the “Letter of Warning” sent to Spartan Mosquito in 2018 that details why the Spartan Mosquito Eradicator does not satisfy the conditions for exemption from registration under Section 25(b) of FIFRA (i.e., the company has falsely claimed it is exempt).

Are you an EPA or FTC enforcement officer?

I would recommend taking a close look at the efficacy data (field trials, case studies, cage experiments, etc.) that the company has been sending to state lead agencies for the Eradicator. Spartan Mosquito is apparently sending data that show a 95% reduction in mosquito populations (to support the claim of 95% efficacy that appears on the box). It would be very interesting, therefore, to know how they managed to get such results. I.e., because salt is not lethal to mosquitoes, the purported 95% reduction must be due to bad experimental design, selective data reporting, or simple fabrication. If it’s the latter (involving lying to the EPA and to state regulators), prison time for some or all AC2T employees is not out of the question.

I’d also recommend scrutinizing the claim on the box (and on instructional brochure inside, and on company’s Facebook page, and on video ads) that mosquitoes will be “drawn” to the tubes. Here’s the issue: Spartan Mosquito admitted to a state regulator (in 2019) that the Spartan Mosquito Eradicator does not emit enough carbon dioxide to attract mosquitoes. Yet the company has continued to make the “draws mosquitoes” claim for years, assuring state regulators that all the claims on the label are true. This seems to be an example of the company, and perhaps its attorneys as well, of knowingly misleading state and federal pesticide authorities. The EPA should also ask the company to provide the CO2 production data for the Spartan Mosquito Pro Tech to see whether the same issue is at play (the company claims the tube attracts mosquitoes).

If you work at the EPA and know details on how the Spartan Mosquito Pro Tech got its registration, please consider reporting your concerns to the Office of the Inspector General. Did the company receive a data waiver? Did efficacy fall below the 95% population reduction required by EPA? Do you have evidence that regulatory shortcomings are being hidden from the public? You can make a tip anonymously.

Are you John Oliver?

This company’s products would make for a fantastic deep-dive into the proliferation of ineffective mosquito control products in the United States and how some states allow these products on shelves even when it’s pretty darn clear they don’t do a thing. Pills, creams, bracelets, zappers, tubes of sugar water. Spartan Mosquito has taken it to the next level and deserves to be exposed for the hive of charlatans it is.

Here’s one of the company’s commercials for the Spartan Mosquito Pro Tech that you can show and say, “coooool.” True fact: the lobbying firm behind Brexit helped to get that tube approved by EPA. Here’s another heartwarming commercial (for its original tube) that involves a guy slapping his kids. For footage of the frontman I recommend this. Or this. Here’s my YouTube playlist with more options.

You could tie segment in with SLAPPs because the company has served me with one. And you could ask your favorite Mosquito Control Board why Spartan Mosquito Eradicators are banned in over a dozen states but not in New Hampshire. You could also ask the American Mosquito Control Association why it hasn’t released its scientific report on Spartan Mosquito.

The company’s Facebook page is also worth a look. They rarely post about their magic tubes, instead opting to rile up the base with, for example, calls for less government interference in business and veiled support for truckers who use their vehicles to protest vaccination requirements. And, more recently, a subtle reference to the Tea Party featuring an Edwardian boy in a dress eating something with a spoon.

Most importantly, Spartan Mosquito owns a rather nice mascot suit and I bet the guy who built it will make one for you. It goes well with attractive models dressed as Spartans, and maybe you could get the whole gang to picket the beautiful Spartan Mosquito production facility in Laurel, Mississippi, for a photo op. For added fun, please give them signs that say, “Release the efficacy data!”, “Please hire a biologist”, and “It’s spelled ENTOMOLOGY no ETYMOLOGY”. I would be entertained.

Consider donating to my GoFundme campaign

My legal battle with Spartan Mosquito is over but I’m still $36,000 in the hole. Donations and/or shares would be hugely appreciated: https://gofund.me/fe59f642.

Does the Spartan Mosquito Pro Tech attract mosquitoes?

21 Replies

This post evaluates the claim on the label, “mosquitoes will gather near them”. Per the company, it is the first step in how the device kills mosquitoes. I.e., the device needs to attract mosquitoes if it is going to work.

Evaluating the claim

I used a security camera to record activity around the cap area. Here’s a photograph of how I arranged everything:

Spartan Mosquito Pro Tech with security camera

Below is a 15-second time-lapse to show that small insects such as ants were easily visible, even at night. I think they are Prenolepis imparis, which are 3-4 mm long —mosquitoes are larger and thus would be detectable even in flight.

On the day that began filming (September 2nd, 2020) I counted over a dozen mosquitoes (all Aedes albopictus) landing on my arms and legs within 30 seconds. According to the instruction sheet, the device begins to work instantly, as soon as water is added, so an hour of remote, video observation should be a sufficient amount of time to evaluate the attraction claim.

Spartan Mosquito Pro Tech begins working instantly

I collected continuous footage for over a week, ending observations on September 10th. The mosquitoes were still plentiful on that day.

Results

During 183 hours of footage, I couldn’t find a single mosquito on or near the device. Here are the contents. I also posted a photograph to iNaturalist.

Conclusion

Because the Spartan Mosquito Pro Tech did not attract any mosquitoes, it therefore did not kill any mosquitoes. If my results are generalizable to other yards, the device is worthless as mechanism of mosquito control.

It is noteworthy, I think, that Spartan Mosquito has not made public a single video of mosquitoes gathering around a Pro Tech (or an Eradicator) when it is deployed outside. My guess is that the company has tried many times to get such footage but has not succeeded in attracting a mosquito. It will be interesting to know whether they will be compelled to disclose their efforts in a court of law. I.e., because the company has formally claimed to the EPA that “mosquitoes will gather” around the Pro Tech, the company would be in substantial legal jeopardy if that statement turned out to be false. If that’s what is going on then it seems likely that the EPA Enforcement Office might coordinate with the FTC as well.

Please also see my page, “Spartan Mosquito Pro Tech review“.

Footage

In case anyone might be skeptical of my results, I decided to upload all 183 hours of footage onto YouTube. I had to break it into 16 segments due to size limits on YouTube.

Yeast-and-sugar mosquito control devices

82 Replies

In the United States, three companies — Spartan Mosquito, Aion Products, and Tougher Than Tom — are selling devices that supposedly kill mosquitoes by luring them inside with carbon dioxide. I tested them in my yard last year and they all killed exactly the same number of mosquitoes: zero. Below are details about how they are marketed, why they don’t work, and why people still buy them.

Spartan Mosquito Pro Tech

Company says tubes kill mosquitoes for up to 30 days. Spartan Mosquito (also known as AC2T, Inc.) was the first to commercialize a yeast-and-sugar tube; the other two companies are copying it to some extent. Based in Hattiesburg, Mississippi, and owned by Josephine Tatum Hood. website: spartanmosquito.com

Aion Mosquito Barrier

Company claims device will kill and repel mosquitoes for 90 days. Much of the advertising seems to be AI-generated. The box claims that part of the profits go to saving marine turtles, but I seriously doubt this happens. Based in Memphis, Tennessee, and owned by Wade Whitely. aion-products.com

Tougher Than Tom’s Mosquito TNT

Company claims they work for 30 days. This company spends a lot of money targeting people with cheesy ads on Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, and Tiktok. Based in Austin, Texas, and owned by Zachary Snyder Collins. website: tougherthantom.com

Do they work?

To my knowledge, there’s no evidence that any of these devices kill mosquitoes. I tested all three of them in my yard in Pennsylvania and none was able to even attract mosquitoes. This is not surprising given the small amount of sugar and yeasts that are included. I.e., even though some carbon dioxide will be produced by the yeast, it will never be enough to fool a mosquito. One would likely needs pounds of sugar to produce the necessary volume of carbon dioxide. Moreover, you would need to keep adding sugar daily to maintain the required output. It is pretty obvious, even before testing, that they can’t work as described.

Another reason why mosquitoes are not attracted to these devices is that mosquitoes use more cues than just carbon dioxide to find hosts. For example, most species also use odor, heat, and visual detection.

Although these devices do not control mosquitoes, they do attract and kill other insects such as flies, beetles, wasps, and ants. Many people view these non-target deaths as evidence that the devices are working.

I have full reviews of the Spartan Mosquito Pro Tech and the Tougher Than Tom Mosquito TNT if you need details. For the Aion Mosquito Barrier, please see my review of the device it copies, the Spartan Mosquito Eradicator (per court order it is longer manufactured).

Why are these companies still in business?

Grifters thrive in the United States because state and federal regulators rarely punish businesses that make false claims about pesticides. It’s also sadly true that we have a generally poor level of science education in the country, and that leaves citizens open to being deceived by even obvious scams. And we have a huge population, so there are hundreds of thousands of people each summer who might give one of these products a chance. For a grifter, it doesn’t really matter than 99% of these people will never buy it again — there will always be hundreds of thousands of new (naive) customers next summer.

There are also people who will keep buying a scam year after year. This happens for a variety of reasons:

Towns, municipalities, and regional health departments often spray insecticides from trucks and airplanes, in the middle of the night, without many residents being aware. And if some of those people have yeast-and-sugar tubes hanging in their yards, they might wrongly assume the lack of mosquitoes is related to the tubes. This scenario is probably common because spraying happens pretty much at the exact time of the year that homeowners place the yeast-and-sugar containers around their yards. For those curious about Mosquito Abatement Districts, this article has a nice summary. You can also ask your local government for details on whether your house is being treated.
Sometimes due to sudden and extended drought conditions, mosquito populations plummet. Again, people might not appreciate that the lack of water is preventing mosquitoes from completing their life cycle and will mistakenly attribute the drop to yeast-and-sugar devices they have deployed around their yards.
Many of the companies encourage homeowners to hang the tubes before the start of the mosquito season. It might seem to some that the tubes are keeping the mosquitoes at bay but in reality it’s because the mosquito season hasn’t started.
Finally, some homeowners spray pyrethroid-based insecticides (like those used by Mosquito Shield and the like) in addition to deploying the yeast-and-sugar contraptions. I’ve seen comments on the internet suggesting that these people believe both are necessary even though in reality the tubes are merely decorative.

Once a person becomes convinced that one of these devices works, they are unlikely to abandon that belief even when presented with clear evidence to the contrary. That’s probably especially true if a person tells multiple friends that a device works. I.e., people can become more and more invested in a false belief over time. Indeed, when the tubes fail in future summers (or during gaps in municipal spraying), true fans of these tubes go to great lengths to blame themselves. For example, they might say, “I don’t think I used the correct temperature of water”, “I may have placed them too close to my house”, or “I should have used a few more tubes.” The companies use the same lines in response to consumer complaints, never acknowledging that the failure is with the tubes themselves.

Colin Purrington's blog

nature photography / natural history / misc