Genetically modified animals

[ub3rman123]

Mutations are normal everyday things. And yes we have been selectively inbreeding those genes for thousands of years as it happens.

 

There is still potential for this sort of thing to go wrong, amongst its out pollination and unethical business carry ons. It hasn't in the sense that it has made people sick or and any known gene transfer has happened,. It's call horizontal gene transfer. And that is actually how GM s*** is made in the first place. And again is a perfectly natural occurrence in nature.

 

I totally did not know this existed:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GloFish

I have heard of that before.

 

I don't see much wrong with that either, gold fish are there to be looked at, modifying the genetics of a fish to make them glow isn't really a bad thing.

 

Wouldn't worry in the least about those fish taking over any native species. I tried, and those little things are hard to keep alive.

[ginnyfizz]

@brokenergy, since I have already said that I am from farming stock you should be aware that I am already fully conversant with selective breeding. That is not the same thing as the introduction of genes from other species (eg human into cattle, various animal into plant). All of that has happened and we do not know the long term effect. We don't know it because we have had it foisted on us in recent years. I know what Ghogiel is saying about the cross pollination issue, there was a huge row when the testing of GM wheat was allowed in a field in Devon...right next to an organic farm who were therefore going to lose their certification...until the field of wheat got mysteriously dug up overnight. Could this happen with GM animals breeding with non GM? Maybe.

 

I object to the way that we are being more or less forced to consume this and believe it should be labelled if GM. And I am not convinced that it is the solution to the problems of the starving, as is so often said.

 

But that is my entire point. Selective breeding can come under GM because you are forcing the "gene" that are the most desireable to the animal. Sure it's safer but there are long term consqences for this as the humble bulldog shows. The bigger issue is not GM but people's lack of scientific knowledge. All it takes is one news story and everyone panics.

 

No, I would not call it panic. It's called caution. I have been around long enough to have experienced when the science gets rushed out and pushed onto the general public without adequate info and research...and it goes wrong. I am after all from a generation, some of whom were affected by a so called wonder drug for morning sickness which fell into that category. My mum never took it, but the mum of a university mate did, with life changing consequences for the son. Thalidomide.

 

Nor have I ever been in favour of selective breeding for extreme "cosmetic" show animal reasons or any other way that compromises the health of the animal.

[marharth]

@brokenergy, since I have already said that I am from farming stock you should be aware that I am already fully conversant with selective breeding. That is not the same thing as the introduction of genes from other species (eg human into cattle, various animal into plant). All of that has happened and we do not know the long term effect. We don't know it because we have had it foisted on us in recent years. I know what Ghogiel is saying about the cross pollination issue, there was a huge row when the testing of GM wheat was allowed in a field in Devon...right next to an organic farm who were therefore going to lose their certification...until the field of wheat got mysteriously dug up overnight. Could this happen with GM animals breeding with non GM? Maybe.

 

I object to the way that we are being more or less forced to consume this and believe it should be labelled if GM. And I am not convinced that it is the solution to the problems of the starving, as is so often said.

 

But that is my entire point. Selective breeding can come under GM because you are forcing the "gene" that are the most desireable to the animal. Sure it's safer but there are long term consqences for this as the humble bulldog shows. The bigger issue is not GM but people's lack of scientific knowledge. All it takes is one news story and everyone panics.

 

No, I would not call it panic. It's called caution. I have been around long enough to have experienced when the science gets rushed out and pushed onto the general public without adequate info and research...and it goes wrong. I am after all from a generation, some of whom were affected by a so called wonder drug for morning sickness which fell into that category. My mum never took it, but the mum of a university mate did, with life changing consequences for the son. Thalidomide.

 

Nor have I ever been in favour of selective breeding for extreme "cosmetic" show animal reasons or any other way that compromises the health of the animal.

Pet fish are for entirely cosmetic reasons anyways. I suppose if it gives them health issues that could be bad, but if its doesn't cause any health problems I don't see the problem.

[Amorous_Dead_Guy]

My dad actually works with genetic modification at Cambridge University, and Is making chickens resistant to the H5N1 strain of bird flu. people seem to claim that he is a barmy doctor who has ulterior motives and is only in it for the money, personally, if I was 'in it for the money' then I would not work on a project for in excess of 7 years! I personally feel genetic scientists really get allot of flack for essentially trying to help the world. Genetically modified crops would cease starvation if they could exist in unforgiving climates, disease resistant animals will mean that pandemics could be halted before they start, and could even be utilised into a vaccine to protect humans, genetic modification does not necessarily mean non-free range either!

I just think it is somewhat blinkered to think that crops and animals who have not been genetically modified are better, because... what? they have a lower yield? more die because no insecticides are used? The animal could actually be contaminated because it has not been protected? It confuses me that the less advanced products are in fact more expensive than the safer, better GM ones, I pay more for Organic beef, and you know what? It tastes the same!

Cosmetic genetic modification, well that is another moral debate, personally I do not see how genetic modification could harm an animal, just because its skin pigmentation is different, does not mean it is suffering. It might lack camouflage it needs in the wild, but designer animals would only be as pets, so that is no longer necessary.

In truth, their is allot of scare mongering that goes on regarding this, and the majority of people simply are not well enough informed to make a properly educated decision about it.

[ginnyfizz]

Apart from being somewhat necro-ing of a thread, that is a somewhat arrogant assumption, that "the majority of people simply are not well enough informed to make a properly educated decision about it." I am old enough to remember what happens when science gets rushed out and foisted on us (read my last post please, and by the way I did my thesis on abnormalities, genetics and the law and got a first.)

[Ghogiel]

I have little doubt actual researchers and scientists actually behind the science and knowledge are for the most part doing it for the right reasons, But the guys who pay the research bill and own the labs, and then thus own the patents on the science are without a doubt unscrupulous bastards that would sell you cancer if that would make them money.

 

The knowledge itself and the knowledge seekers are a benefit to mankind and even with the science of something that is as potentially as dangerous as splitting the atom, I will still commend them their contributions to the human race.

 

Though I 100% disagree with your statement of organic beef vs say american superfarm raised beef. The taste is actually the least of my concern with that. Their food industry is unbeleivable. I'm in the UK and presume you are to if your old fella is at Cambridge, We don't have to worry about it so bad here, the EU have very strict regulations on this sort of thing. And bans a lot of the hormones and antibiotics that are used in their food. You shouldn't beable to find american beef or milk products that don't meet the regulations.

 

These EU regulations are a blessing and a curse imo. On the one hand they have the correct attitude on crap in our food, outright banning it is the way to do it imo, but then they ban this awesome orange color dye for vinyl plastic... it's only toxic if you eat it :wallbash:

 

It is a bit :wacko: at times

[Amorous_Dead_Guy]

@ginnyfizz

 

I did not at any point say that you were ignorant of anything, my comment was referring to a large group of people who have no proper understanding of the principal and think that GM food is going to suddenly come alive and attack them (beetlejuice dinner party style) If someone such as yourself has valid concerns about GM foods then that is no problem at all, and you should be fully entitled to explanations. It is the people that claim that (and I quote from the comments page of the Guardian newspaper) "Frankenstein Foods will cause the zombie apocalypse" Now this is not only scaremongering, but I think everybody would agree, highly ignorant. Not only does it start up the rumors about this sort of thing in the first place, but it also makes everybody with valid concerns get drowned out by the majority of general public ignorance.

 

@Ghogiel

big pharmaceuticals are definitely only in it for the money, but the labs are university owned ones and the projects are mostly university funded. Unfortunately the amount of resources and money required to be invested means that the research cannot be funded merely on university finance alone. It's necessary to involve big business investments in order to secure the funding to continue (my pa has had to let his postdoc go simply because he cannot afford to keep him on with the budget cuts.) In this way, the involvement of industry is to an advantage, as researchers can afford the facilities they need, and furthermore, the hesitant governments do not have enough funding to afford the mass production of the vaccine/genetic modification, meaning that big industry is left to step in to do it for them. Of course this means that the process costs the individual money, but in my opinion it is better than not being able to have the process at all.