Sometimes I really HATE people!

[Nero]

http://www.switched.com/2007/12/13/scientists-clone-fluorescent-cats/

[Butterfly]

I adamantly love all animals & this is a horrid example of legalized animal cruelty.  I often wish I was a dictator of the world and I would put to death (without trial) anyone who was even the slightest cruel to any animal.  I think whatever a person does to an animal should be done unto them.

[buttercup]

I saw that on the news last night, and thought how disgusting and unbelievable!!
Some of these scientists think they have a license to do whatever!!! And the worse part is that you know that many kitties died just to get these ones who could withstand the affects of chemicals etc.
These people are sick, sick, sick, sick!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!            

[Dorothy]

I often wish I was a dictator of the world and I would put to death (without trial) anyone who was even the slightest cruel to any animal.

Yes definitely.  Its horrible and those scientists should all be shot. I cant believe how people can willingly do that to an animal.  Anyone that hurts an animal should suffer the same treatment.  In my eyes that sort of people should be given the cat of nine tails.

[Wing Walker]

Let's have a look at this article about the cats, then let's get our torches and pitchforks together as need be.

Here's the Tiny URL   http://tinyurl.com/39gsc9

Perhaps these kitties are descendants of the late Benny Hill's character, "Redeye the Wonder Cat."

Wing Walker
I Miss My Calico

[Laura91]

I adamantly love all animals & this is a horrid example of legalized animal cruelty.  I often wish I was a dictator of the world and I would put to death (without trial) anyone who was even the slightest cruel to any animal.  I think whatever a person does to an animal should be done unto them.

Yeah, that is really messed up.

[AlwaysLauren]

I understand outrage as a first response to this, but I'm not sure it's a reasonable reaction. I think this bit from the article is really telling:

We might not be biologists, but we're not really sure what the connection between AIDS and a cat that looks like a jack-o-lantern is.

As I understand it, these cats are made by splicing in DNA from one animal (jellyfish I think) into another. This sort of work helps us (us being humanity) understand how to manipulate the basic building blocks of life. This isn't the end result of a bunch of scientists sitting around drinking beers where one goes "Hey, how about a glowing cat?"

While there is definitely an argument to be made that humanity has no right to manipulate DNA (not that anyone here seems to be making it), this sort of research really does have the possibility to make life better for many many people, and I'm not sure curing AIDS is so far fetched.

All that aside, I'm not sure the cats are suffering. Is it animal abuse to breed a cat to be a different color? Is breeding for color any different than manipulating genes to produce a different color? If there's no real difference there (and I don't think there is) is glowing a huge step beyond?

Finally (sorry for going on so long), I really don't understand where anyone is coming from when they're suggesting hurting the scientists. The concept of "How dare you harm kittes! let's set you on fire!" doesn't make any sense. If hurting cats is bad (not that I think they're being hurt), so is hurting scientists.

EDIT: Rereading the article, the first comment really does a good job in explaining how I feel about this.

[Wing Walker]

I understand outrage as a first response to this, but I'm not sure it's a reasonable reaction. I think this bit from the article is really telling:

We might not be biologists, but we're not really sure what the connection between AIDS and a cat that looks like a jack-o-lantern is.

As I understand it, these cats are made by splicing in DNA from one animal (jellyfish I think) into another. This sort of work helps us (us being humanity) understand how to manipulate the basic building blocks of life. This isn't the end result of a bunch of scientists sitting around drinking beers where one goes "Hey, how about a glowing cat?"

While there is definitely an argument to be made that humanity has no right to manipulate DNA (not that anyone here seems to be making it), this sort of research really does have the possibility to make life better for many many people, and I'm not sure curing AIDS is so far fetched.

All that aside, I'm not sure the cats are suffering. Is it animal abuse to breed a cat to be a different color? Is breeding for color any different than manipulating genes to produce a different color? If there's no real difference there (and I don't think there is) is glowing a huge step beyond?

Finally (sorry for going on so long), I really don't understand where anyone is coming from when they're suggesting hurting the scientists. The concept of "How dare you harm kittes! let's set you on fire!" doesn't make any sense. If hurting cats is bad (not that I think they're being hurt), so is hurting scientists.

EDIT: Rereading the article, the first comment really does a good job in explaining how I feel about this.

I am all for jail time for cruelty to animals.  I have called the police and SPCA when I have seen someone's dog freezing in the night or come upon a house with such a stink from animal excrement that someone had to know.

I learned the very hard way about inflicting pain on animals when I was about 7 or 8.  I pegged a rock at a cat and it hit it in the side.  I heard a thump and as soon as I did I felt that cat's pain.  I instantly knew I had done wrong because the cat had the ability to feel the pain that I had inflicted.

Sensitively yours,

Wing Walker

[Keira]

Creating cats or any animal with special genes added or substracted
helps in finding out exactly what this gene does.

Instead of doing research on humans, you could do research on
animals with spliced in specific DNA segments (like those
responsible for fat processing for example).

Knockout mices have been used for years (knockout means
a gene has been disactivated). Mices can have a many
generations in the space of small lapse of time,
so you can study things in very controlled settings
that would be impossible on humans.

They did this on cats because of the publicity value.
Cats are seen as a higher level animal by people (but
they're just cuter than rats :-) so this stunt would
garner more media attention than doing it on ugly rats.

[AlwaysLauren]

I am all for jail time for cruelty to animals.  I have called the police and SPCA when I have seen someone's dog freezing in the night or come upon a house with such a stink from animal excrement that someone had to know.

I learned the very hard way about inflicting pain on animals when I was about 7 or 8.  I pegged a rock at a cat and it hit it in the side.  I heard a thump and as soon as I did I felt that cat's pain.  I instantly knew I had done wrong because the cat had the ability to feel the pain that I had inflicted.

Sensitively yours,

Wing Walker

I'm with you 100% on animal abuse, I just don't think this is it.

[Blanche]

Yea, it is done for genetic research, to see how genes and proteins can be manipulated. This kind of manipulation may be the savior for some endangered animal species in the world one day, as this kind of work will help make clones with more genetic variety to boost dwindling gene poles of rare animals on the edge of extinction. It is one way to insure they will not be inbred with so few animals available as breeding stock. It isn't all a bad thing; these kittens were born as I see it, nor was it only done for kicks.  I would like to see a fluorescent human baby next >

[Nero]

I understand outrage as a first response to this, but I'm not sure it's a reasonable reaction. I think this bit from the article is really telling:

We might not be biologists, but we're not really sure what the connection between AIDS and a cat that looks like a jack-o-lantern is.

As I understand it, these cats are made by splicing in DNA from one animal (jellyfish I think) into another. This sort of work helps us (us being humanity) understand how to manipulate the basic building blocks of life. This isn't the end result of a bunch of scientists sitting around drinking beers where one goes "Hey, how about a glowing cat?"

While there is definitely an argument to be made that humanity has no right to manipulate DNA (not that anyone here seems to be making it), this sort of research really does have the possibility to make life better for many many people, and I'm not sure curing AIDS is so far fetched.

All that aside, I'm not sure the cats are suffering. Is it animal abuse to breed a cat to be a different color? Is breeding for color any different than manipulating genes to produce a different color? If there's no real difference there (and I don't think there is) is glowing a huge step beyond?

Finally (sorry for going on so long), I really don't understand where anyone is coming from when they're suggesting hurting the scientists. The concept of "How dare you harm kittes! let's set you on fire!" doesn't make any sense. If hurting cats is bad (not that I think they're being hurt), so is hurting scientists.

EDIT: Rereading the article, the first comment really does a good job in explaining how I feel about this.

Humans have been known to err greatly in their quest for 'the greater good'. Curing AIDS? Remember how AIDS came about in the first place.

[AlwaysLauren]

Humans have been known to err greatly in their quest for 'the greater good'. Curing AIDS? Remember how AIDS came about in the first place.

I don't understand. As far as I know the origin of AIDS isn't anything sinister...









^{Edit- Nero misspelled something in your quote.}

[Nero]

Not sinister. Just an accident. Created through the best of intentions.

[RebeccaFog]

Not sinister. Just an accident. Created through the best of intentions.

Stop it.  You're killing me with the suspense.  How did it happen?

No one ever told me (I'm always the last to know things).

[Nero]

Not sinister. Just an accident. Created through the best of intentions.

Stop it.  You're killing me with the suspense.  How did it happen?

No one ever told me (I'm always the last to know things).

Mix the Dark Continent, some chimps, the polio vaccine, and a careless scientist and you've got a recipe for disaster.
It's not common knowledge because it's too horrible for us to contemplate. In a nutshell - the chimps had it, they were an ingredient in the vaccine, tons of Africans were vaccinated and that's how it was transferred to humans. To this day, those responsible deny it.

Goes to look for links for Reebs

[RebeccaFog]

Oh.

I heard the ape part before but I didn't know about the polio part.  It makes sense because you wouldn't expect it to be passed through eating the apes.

[tinkerbell]

I would like to see a fluorescent human baby next >

So would I.  How would people react if they created a glow in the dark human baby?  I would love to see people's reaction then.  After all, the baby would be born; he would not suffer and everything would be done in the name of science, right?

Give me a break people, this is WRONG, WRONG, WRONG! 

tink

[Pica Pica]

I adamantly love all animals & this is a horrid example of legalized animal cruelty.  I often wish I was a dictator of the world and I would put to death (without trial) anyone who was even the slightest cruel to any animal.  I think whatever a person does to an animal should be done unto them.

we'd all be dead. Ever trod on an ant?

[RebeccaFog]

maybe science can create glowing ants so you'd see them better.

   I have actually stumbled upon a plan to prevent the spread of malaria by inoculating the mosquitoes so they don't carry the cause.  This will be a fantastic health plan I propose which will be implemented across 6 continents, as mosquitoes probably don't live in Antarctica.

   My glowing ant proposal will be next.  Maybe we should glow elephants so that poachers won't accidentally kill them when they are shooting at other nearly extinct species.

It's all in the planning.  When I'm done, this world will be a far far better place, than Pittsburgh.


Dr. Rebis McCoy