Sometimes, the New York Times is partly right

 The New York Times had an article, "An Invasive Mosquito Threatens Catastrophe in Africa". It seems there is a new mosquito that thrives in arid climates and it is invading some African cities. The countryside is wet enough that there are lots of mosquitoes, and the healthcare professionals recognise malaria. But in some of the desert cities, there were no mosquitoes, hence no malaria, and healthcare professionals have no idea what they're seeing or how to treat it.

Where I am, in the Arabian desert (sometimes called "The Empty Quarter" since there wasn't much here when the Brits came), there were no mosquitoes. Until about one or two years ago. Now my apartment building is full of them. I read about flypaper when I was a boy, some 60 years ago, but I never saw any. But then I saw some in the supermarket, bought some, put it up, and it was soon covered with mosquitoes.

So the problem is not just in African cities, as the New York Times warned. This new and improved mosquito thrives in lots of arid places where mosquitoes formerly could not manage.

Before the New York Times article, I put the problem down to development: the town where I live and the African cities where the New York Times reported the problem have a lot more people than 20 years ago, so lots more trash that people put out with liquid in it. The New York Times said a big problem is bottle caps that have a tiny bit of liquid, enough for the new mosquito to breed.

But I'm guessing the New York Times are correct that there is, in fact, a new kind of mosquito that is very resistant to lack of water and these new mosquitoes are establishing themselves in places where mosquitoes formerly could not manage. They've certainly established themselves here.