Genetically Engineering Kittens and Cats...

I was watching the news this evening and a preview for the 11pm news came up saying that there was a new way for people with allergies against animals to still have them as pets. No the person would not be doped up on medication instead the animal in question would be genetically engineered to not give the owner allergic reactions! This pissed me off! I am going to watch the segment and see what they have to say. This is not right at all...Oh I want a kitty kitty but I think I will mutilate it till it is not a fuckin animal and in pain anymore!!

 

What's wrong with it? You do understand how genetic engineering works right?

 

No...i just asumed it was hurting the animal...taking away their natural aspects...

 

It would all be done before it's even born... The cat wouldn't know anything was different, as would have been that way it's whole life...

 

ah...but it still feels odd...i mean would they do that on a human...

 

There are laws against it I believe.... But you can do it in china!

 

only thing that's gonna tick me off about it is you just KNOW that they'll neuter em all before they leave the lab so you'll always have to buy a new overpriced one and can never just breed em like normal kitties.

I might get my son one someday...cats make my eyes itch and he wants one.

Hell we eat genetically modified foods every day...I doubt adding a genetically modified kitty to the mix will raise our cancer rates any higher.

 

It probably would be best for them to be sterile.... There are more than enough cats already... and just in case something went wrong, don't want the gene to get out into the general population...

 

yeah...i 'spose we have enough problems with genetically modified foods getting into places they're not supposed to be...with kitties it'd be even worse.

 

genetical engineered pets would condition the public into accepting genetical engineered people. if its ok to have g/e a cat why not a child.

 

Why are people always against genetic engineering? What about it's potential to improve people's lives?

 

You wouldn't genetically engineer a child to make your life more comfortable, would you? I'm sure there are some sickos out there that would prefer that, but that is not right, changing the natural order of things

 

I meant more like preventing disease and such...

 

I would select embryos to rule out hereditary diseases...so yeah, I would accept a genetically "engineered" child into my life. Not to make my life easier tho...but to make the child's life less painful and full of sickness.

 

Hereditary... Thats the word I was looking for... Hehe couldn't think of it earlier for some reason...

 

Tinkering with animals' genetic makeup in the lab causes animal suffering. For every successfully cloned animal, for example, an average 98 are destroyed. Animals resulting from genetic manipulation have been born with freakishly abnormal birth weights, genetic weaknesses, and shortened life expectancies. The famous "Dolly" the sheep, for instance, aged more quickly than a normal sheep and started showing the problems of old age before her time. Of course, we never get to see all of the test "Dollys" and other animals who die or are euthanized before the lab workers get it right.
In the US and many other parts of the world, thousands of cats are destroyed across the nation every week simply because there are not enough homes for them. Bringing more "designer" cats into the world doesn't help the lab-created cat, nor cats in need of homes. The only one who benefits from this bizarre new "status symbol pet" is the lab's bank account.
Cloning allergy-free cats does not significantly contribute to human or animal health and welfare. People who are allergic to cats but desire a pet could just as easily adopt another type of animal--there are countless dogs, rabbits, birds, guinea pigs, etc. etc. who need good homes. Besides, there already exist cat breeds with short, curly hair or no hair, and minimal shedding.
Lab-generated pets are basically high-priced status symbols and novelty objects. This view of animals as a product that can be manipulated right down to their DNA helps neither animals or people.

 

lol...i just did a research paper on hereditary diseases...
and I'm supposed to be doing another research paper right now...
if I could just get off this site...........

 

Totally agree with Peacegal

I can appreciate the benefits of gentic screening for embryos, to avoid/cure diseases and such. Otherwise it just seems wrong to play God without knowing the implications.

 

Undoubtedly, present genetical engineering primarily benefits big companies. Human, let alone animal interest is secondary here. Imagine, however, if people in the future invented a way to genetically alter the need of carnivores for meat!!! People have only known about DNA for about 50 years(?), so it seems completely possible we'll be able to radically change ourselves and our surroundings in the future. The problem is - for better or for worse?


www.vegetarismus.ch/vegepet/tyke.htm - a vegetarian lioness! OK, I'm not so sure I can swallow this, but it really seems nice

Love,
Dan