Ethical Implications of Animal Genetic Modification - Betta Fish and Betta Fish Care
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #1 of 25 (permalink) Old 09-03-2010, 08:54 PM Thread Starter
Member
 
Alex09's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 1,364
Ethical Implications of Animal Genetic Modification

Lets have some serious talk

So the title states it all. I just found out about a genetically modified fish (Zebra Danios) called GloFish.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FpGdGTUuodw

According to Wikipedia:
"In 1999, Dr. Zhiyuan Gong and his colleagues at the National University of Singapore were working with a gene called green fluorescent protein (GFP), originally extracted from a jellyfish, that naturally produced bright green bioluminescence. They inserted the gene into a zebrafish embryo, allowing it to integrate into the zebrafish's genome, which caused the fish to be brightly fluorescent under both natural white light and ultraviolet light."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glofish

If they started making glow in the dark bettas (or rabits, hamsters, birds etc) Would you support it? would you buy it? Or would be horrified?

My personal opinion:
I'm not against genetically modified (GM) animals at all. We have been doing it for decades thats why the wild betta and the domesticated betta are so different. For example, I wouldnt mind buying a betta that has been GM'd to be peaceful with others of its own species. But I believe making glow in the dark animals as novelty items is going a bit too far.

I read the Book Jurassic Park By Michael chricton and despite it being fiction it is really good at highlighting the implications of GM'img animals. For example:

A company creates a GM'd giant betta that glows in the dark > They create patents > They then GM that betta to only be able to eat the company's brand of food, and only live in their company's brand of special "betta water" > They soon become a rich industry.

All this so they can make the most money out of you. And despite all this people will stay pay it because it will be a new novelty item. Thats just my thoughts on it. What do you guys think?

Last edited by Alex09; 09-03-2010 at 09:00 PM.
Alex09 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 25 (permalink) Old 09-03-2010, 09:38 PM
New Member
 
ReyesBetta's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Muskegon, Michigan
Posts: 153
I love GloFish, I plan on getting some. However when I do this it won't be so they can be decor. They'll be pets. If companies start GM'ing animals, PETA, HSUS, and Greenpeace will be knocking their doors down.

To be able to GM an animal to only eat certain food and breathe certain waters is fairly far down the road, and the feds would probably do somthing about this.

Though the concept of GloFish is wrong (which the part that bugs me is that a TM is in their names), it doesn't hurt the fish. It's like making an albino snake, but it just needed some help.

GloFish is (probably) a multimillion dollar industry and will probably not be taken down for a LONG LONG time.

To be honest, if I find a lime green bunny I'm buying it!

1.0.0 betta splendens - 1.1.0 felis catus - 0.1.0 thamnophis sirtalis
ReyesBetta is offline  
post #3 of 25 (permalink) Old 09-03-2010, 09:48 PM
Member
 
JKfish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Georgia
Posts: 2,428
In my eyes, it is a bit unetchical, no matter what the animal, but I don't feel the need to be one of those stark raving mad people ( like PETA). while I think the glofish look interesting, I personally wouldn't buy them seeing as I think they'd look ugly and out of place in a natural tank and that I prefer their unaltered color combos better.:)

JKfish is offline  
post #4 of 25 (permalink) Old 09-03-2010, 09:50 PM
New Member
 
ReyesBetta's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Muskegon, Michigan
Posts: 153
Ditto. If I buy GloFish they'll be in their own low-lit tank with black gravel.

1.0.0 betta splendens - 1.1.0 felis catus - 0.1.0 thamnophis sirtalis
ReyesBetta is offline  
post #5 of 25 (permalink) Old 09-03-2010, 09:56 PM Thread Starter
Member
 
Alex09's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 1,364
Quote:
To be able to GM an animal to only eat certain food and breathe certain waters is fairly far down the road, and the feds would probably do somthing about this.
I remember the story on Jurassic park found a loophole for that too. I think it was because they were planning on making mini- dinosaurs and selling them as pets. They made the animals lysine (a protein that is normally created by the bodies of organisms) dependent. They took away their ability to make that protein and they instead put that protein in the food. So without their special food dosed with lysine the animals would die. But that never happened because all the dinosaurs went wild and killed everyone. Michael Chricton's novels are amazingly realistic and very well researched.

Anyways when you have a building full of lawyers (and a lot of $$$) you can always find a loophole in the law.

___________________

Glofish are illegal in California - that must be why I have never heard of them...

Last edited by Alex09; 09-03-2010 at 09:59 PM.
Alex09 is offline  
post #6 of 25 (permalink) Old 09-03-2010, 10:30 PM
New Member
 
ReyesBetta's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Muskegon, Michigan
Posts: 153
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex09 View Post
I remember the story on Jurassic park found a loophole for that too. I think it was because they were planning on making mini- dinosaurs and selling them as pets. They made the animals lysine (a protein that is normally created by the bodies of organisms) dependent. They took away their ability to make that protein and they instead put that protein in the food. So without their special food dosed with lysine the animals would die. But that never happened because all the dinosaurs went wild and killed everyone. Michael Chricton's novels are amazingly realistic and very well researched.

Anyways when you have a building full of lawyers (and a lot of $$$) you can always find a loophole in the law.

___________________

Glofish are illegal in California - that must be why I have never heard of them...
Hmm, I gotta agree with you on that one.

1.0.0 betta splendens - 1.1.0 felis catus - 0.1.0 thamnophis sirtalis
ReyesBetta is offline  
post #7 of 25 (permalink) Old 09-03-2010, 10:38 PM
Member
 
Drift's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: PA
Posts: 273
I thought I read glofish were originally being GM'ed to react to certain toxins in the water. They were to glow when the toxins became present to help researchers.Or I could have just had some crazy dream about that being their origin. I can't recall were they thought came from.

I had them and really didn't like them. I felt all of them, as I had 7 in a 10 gallon, were extremely aggresive.

10 Gallon Divided Betta Tank
Shaman the Halfmoon
Durban the Crowntail
20 Long Community Tank
9 Glowlight Tetra
6 3-Lined Cory's
A mob of Ghost Shrimp
Drift is offline  
post #8 of 25 (permalink) Old 09-03-2010, 10:47 PM Thread Starter
Member
 
Alex09's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 1,364
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drift View Post
I thought I read glofish were originally being GM'ed to react to certain toxins in the water. They were to glow when the toxins became present to help researchers.Or I could have just had some crazy dream about that being their origin. I can't recall were they thought came from.

I had them and really didn't like them. I felt all of them, as I had 7 in a 10 gallon, were extremely aggresive.
No you were right:
"Their goal was to develop a fish that could detect pollution by selectively fluorescing in the presence of environmental toxins. The development of the constantly fluorescing fish was the first step in this process. Shortly thereafter, his team developed a line of red fluorescent zebra fish by adding a gene from a sea coral, and yellow fluorescent zebra fish, by adding a variant of the jellyfish gene. Later, a team of researchers at the National University of Taiwan, headed by Professor Huai-Jen Tsai (蔡懷禎), succeeded in creating a medaka (rice fish) with a fluorescent green color.
The scientists from NUS and businessmen Alan Blake and Richard Crockett from Yorktown Technologies, L.P., a company in Austin, Texas, met and a deal was signed whereby Yorktown obtained the worldwide rights to market the GloFish. At around the same time, a separate deal was made between Taikong, the largest aquarium fish producer in Taiwan, and the Taiwanese researchers to market the green medaka in Taiwan under the name TK-1. In the spring of 2003, Taiwan became the first to authorize sales of a genetically modified organism as a pet. One hundred thousand fish were reportedly sold in less than a month at US$18.60 each. It should be clarified that the fluorescent medaka are not GloFish, as they are not marketed by Yorktown Technologies, but instead by Taikong Corp under a different brand name."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glofish
Alex09 is offline  
post #9 of 25 (permalink) Old 09-04-2010, 12:00 AM
Member
 
1fish2fish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Savannah, GA
Posts: 5,904
I don't believe in Genetic Modification when it comes to companion animals. There is NO point in creating a glow in the dark fish. IMO that is disgusting. It is one thing to selectively breed for a trait and cultivate that trait through generations but it is another to pump chemicals into an animal just for the fun of it.

Genetic modification for the greater good (i.e. when applied to battle cancer or attempt to prevent down syndrome or autism) would be an honorable goal to work towards... not messing with nature just because it looks "cool".

Their original goal had good intention behind it, however there are much better ways to detect pollution in water besides turning a fish into a test strip.

*Be smart.. Do your research!!*[/COLOR][/FONT]
[/CENTER]

1fish2fish is offline  
post #10 of 25 (permalink) Old 09-04-2010, 12:04 AM
New Member
 
ReyesBetta's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Muskegon, Michigan
Posts: 153
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1fish2fish View Post
I don't believe in Genetic Modification when it comes to companion animals. There is NO point in creating a glow in the dark fish. IMO that is disgusting. It is one thing to selectively breed for a trait and cultivate that trait through generations but it is another to pump chemicals into an animal just for the fun of it.

Genetic modification for the greater good (i.e. when applied to battle cancer or attempt to prevent down syndrome or autism) would be an honorable goal to work towards... not messing with nature just because it looks "cool".

Their original goal had good intention behind it, however there are much better ways to detect pollution in water besides turning a fish into a test strip.
Hearing that changes my views.. if we can send a person to the moon we can create an in-tank water tester that constantly monitors water stats.

1.0.0 betta splendens - 1.1.0 felis catus - 0.1.0 thamnophis sirtalis
ReyesBetta is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Betta Fish and Betta Fish Care forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in









Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome