Turns Out That Glofish Pics Arent Doctored

[Dorkhedeos]

omg I can't belive they are trademarking this, its just cruel, btw wouldn't thier lights stress out other fish in a community tank?

nope, they dont emit light that we can see under normal conditions, you only can see it under a blacklight i believe

 

[Bre_B]

Just thought i'd mention for some people.... keep in mind also, while ranting here ( ) that a vast majority of the food we eat (plant and meat) were genetically altered to be improved (strawberries are a major example. It's impossible to find un-altered strawberries in a regular supermarket.) or an alarming amount even -created- by man altering genes and hybridizing plants with one another. so if you are fighting against, keep in mind that what you eat is what you are against along with it.

 

[Dorkhedeos]

those who opposed genetically modified foods must be awfully rich to afford to shop at all organic supermarkets

 

[Ethos]

Yeah, really. we have one of those stores by us, and they have like.. $11 cereals.
I spend like $3 ones when i'm getting cereal for my folks and me.

 

[luka11486]

Actually now that i think of it...i knew that already

 

[Synirr]

Glofish are not hybrids. Hybrids are the offspring of two separate species, and Glofish are not the offspring of jellyfish and danios, they are simply danios with a few jellyfish genes; there is a difference. That's like saying we have hybrid spider-goats, since there are goats that have been modified to produce proteins found in spider silk in their milk, or that we have human-bacteria hybrids because bacteria have been modified to contain the human insulin gene in order to produce insulin on a massive scale.

Genetic engineering can be responsible for major meddling in a natural habitat.

So can human population, period. We've screwed up environments for thousands of years by destroying habitat and introducing non-native species to habitats in which they do not belong. There used to be no horses or STDs in America, no corn in Europe, and no rabbits or cane toads in Australia. Heck, cats, dogs, cattle, and other domestic beasts wouldn't exist at all if it weren't for us. We humans are constantly altering the environment to suit our needs and will continue to do so well into the future for better or worse, and I doubt genetic engineering is going to do any more damage than pre-existing invasive species already do. Besides, we'll either bring about catastrophic climate changes via global warming or send ourselves into a nuclear winter long before we have to worry about genetic engineering causing any serious problems

Just thought i'd mention for some people.... keep in mind also, while ranting here ( ) that a vast majority of the food we eat (plant and meat) were genetically altered to be improved (strawberries are a major example. It's impossible to find un-altered strawberries in a regular supermarket.) or an alarming amount even -created- by man altering genes and hybridizing plants with one another. so if you are fighting against, keep in mind that what you eat is what you are against along with it.

Haha, no kidding. Even without intentional genetic modification, selective breeding alone has altered pretty much every species we use into something significantly different than the natural variety (think of chihuahuas vs. wolves.) They make apples that taste like grapes now... they're called grapples.

 

[Angry_Platy]

Whoever disagrees with glofish should also stop eating bananas, and strawberries, and tomatoes....gee...I could go on and on. The original banana had seeds like watermelon and had no sweetness at all. It was through hybridisation that we got the bananas we eat today.

"Man intervened long ago and crossed two varieties of African wild bananas, the Musa acuminata and the Musa baalbisiana, got rid of the many seeds that were an unpleasant presence, and improved the flavor and texture from hard and unappetizing to its present soft and irresistibly sweet flavor. "

And carrots aren't meant to be orange. The original carrots were a grey/cream colour. But how will they get people to eat a grey ugly looking vegetable.

"The bright orange fleshy root vegetable we know today as the carrot is a far cry from its wild ancestor, a small tough, pale fleshed acrid root plant"

There also used to be purple carrots. I think that'd be kinda cool eating a purple carrot

 

[Jules H-T]

I am not opposed to genetic engineering full stop (period). I am urging caution and research, not damning the technology as folly out of hand.

I am opposed to private companies (who are all entirely profit driven) operating in an unregulated capacity and releasing their Frankenstein’s monsters into the wild though.

The question of the fertility of these Glofish is not mentioned explicitly on the site that I can see, but is probably the most important issue for me. It is implicit though in their statements about descending from lines and about how there are no other differences from normal fish, that they are fertile. That worries me.

Some points, for the debate.

Cats, dogs, cattle, and other domestic beasts wouldn't exist at all if it weren't for us.

This is totally different to the matter at hand. These beasts were not “invented”; they were the product of the natural process of selection in which humans were a factor. Let’s appreciate the difference?

Just because 20,000 years of people picking corn with the biggest cobs and planting the seeds from it have resulted in corn with large cobs, it does not justify the parallel between that example and genetically mixing a potato and an apple tree so that we can pick potatoes without a spade.

…We've screwed up environments for thousands of years by destroying habitat and introducing non-native species to habitats in which they do not belong.

A very good point. This is the first step from the first example towards the possible effects of genetic engineering and serves as a warning. This is taking naturally available resources, and putting them into an unprepared environment. We’ve seen what happens.

Killer bees, in Meso-America (and heading North) are a poignant example of where things have been taken outside of the natural processes and it has unleashed mayhem. Chaos can be (and regularly has been), unwittingly caused by bypassing a natural boundary to an evolution (in this case geography).

So now we move a step further from natural selection. Introducing unnatural creations into unprepared environments. Based on experience, what effects do we think this is likely to have? None? Good? Bad? It follows that serious and unforeseen side effects will be the consequence of releasing genetically engineered plants and animals into the wild. These may not be manifest until long after it’s too late.

How do we know that a few generations down the road these glofish won’t mate with another species of danio that has another gene switched on, and the combined effect is that the new hybrid danios develop stings at the end of all their fins, and they wipe out their natural predators with it?

Or wait for the day when some company tries to release a genetically engineered pathogen that is more virulent but less deadly than a naturally occurring one, and it goes horribly wrong and we get killer bees (figuratively speaking).

Consider this question: Let’s say we could genetically engineer babies after fertilisation to remove the Sickle-Cell anaemia gene. Does that sound like a good idea?

OK, so we do that to all babies in N America, and no one there ever gets sickle-cell anaemia again. Still a good idea?

What happens when someone brings a tsetse fly to the US? And it bites someone who gets Malaria. Where is the natural resistance to Malaria in a certain proportion of the human population, which guarantees the survival of our race? If you didn’t already know, we removed it in the last paragraph.

It is one of the stated intentions of this company to apply their work in a medical sense. That means GM humans as far as I can work out.

Are you sure that as members of the public we should blindly embrace these technologies and trust the companies that are driving this research for profit?

All I’ve ever said is that caution really does need to be applied here, and anyone who disagrees with that needs their head examined.

Besides, we'll either bring about catastrophic climate changes via global warming or send ourselves into a nuclear winter long before we have to worry about genetic engineering causing any serious problems

I appreciate how tongue in cheek that is, but at the same time many a true word is spoken in jest. Many people do think like this.

I’m trying to avoid politically charged comments, but there have been developments around the world in recent years that are contrary to addressing these issue.

those who opposed genetically modified foods must be awfully rich to afford to shop at all organic supermarkets

In the EU, if a food contains or consists of genetically modified organisms (GMOs), or contains ingredients produced from GMOs, this must be indicated on the label. I don’t know if that’s the case in the States? Over here in the UK, GM foods are in a small minority and we do not need to pay a premium to avoid them in my experience.

 

[jungle king]

these red, blue and green transgenic fish are used as underwater canaries. They became an exclusive display at jelly world now there starting to take over the world.

Said Dr Gong Zhiyuan who led the NUS research team in the glow-fish cultivation: 'With the success of the zebrafish, the transgenic technology can now be readily introduced to any species.'

Hmmm now that I think about it having the same ability as an electric eel would be cool

 

[Dorkhedeos]

those who opposed genetically modified foods must be awfully rich to afford to shop at all organic supermarkets

In the EU, if a food contains or consists of genetically modified organisms (GMOs), or contains ingredients produced from GMOs, this must be indicated on the label. I don’t know if that’s the case in the States? Over here in the UK, GM foods are in a small minority and we do not need to pay a premium to avoid them in my experience.

in the us, they dont have to tell you anything except for the ingredients that are used to make the product. vegetables dont even have a tag on them, except for the barcode sticker. i just recently learned from my dad they they spray DDT onto salted fish maybe thats why everybody thinks our homemade salted fish is "Ho lang" which is very nice in chinese

 

[Synirr]

The original banana had seeds like watermelon and had no sweetness at all.

Interesting tidbit about modern day bananas, the fruit is trisomic and thus infertile, hence the lack of seeds. This is also how we get seedless watermelons and grapes, and infertile grass carp used to get rid of your aquatic weed problem without giving you a grass carp problem

Cats, dogs, cattle, and other domestic beasts wouldn't exist at all if it weren't for us.

This is totally different to the matter at hand. These beasts were not “invented”; they were the product of the natural process of selection in which humans were a factor. Let’s appreciate the difference?

Just because 20,000 years of people picking corn with the biggest cobs and planting the seeds from it have resulted in corn with large cobs, it does not justify the parallel between that example and genetically mixing a potato and an apple tree so that we can pick potatoes without a spade.

It's a lot less different than you'd think, actually. Genetic engineering is just a more direct and fast method of producing the desired changes in an organism. If you think it's ok to equate human selection to natural selection, then it ought to be ok to equate genetic modification with random mutation. Human selection and genetic modification are both completely unnatural processes, and are both equally capable of creating monsters, it's just that selection takes longer to do so. Domestic sheep and goats are so good at surviving, for example, that they can completely out-compete wild species and destroy habitat in a matter of years. They're also so good at reproducing that it's almost impossible to get rid of them once they've made themselves at home.
The prospect of any highly domesticated species getting loose in the wild is just as scary to me as genetically modified species getting loose. If they're better at surviving in the environment than native species that fill the same niche, the devastation they have the potential to cause is the same.

So now we move a step further from natural selection. Introducing unnatural creations into unprepared environments. Based on experience, what effects do we think this is likely to have? None? Good? Bad?

The problem is that the vast majority of people really only care about themselves in the long run, and manipulation of the environment has given us great rewards with very little ill effect on human populations.... SO FAR. It absolutely cannot stay like that forever, the planet simply is not capable of supporting it, but the pessimist in me says we aren't going to realise that until it's too late.

How do we know that a few generations down the road these glofish won’t mate with another species of danio that has another gene switched on, and the combined effect is that the new hybrid danios develop stings at the end of all their fins, and they wipe out their natural predators with it?

Haha, it's funny to think about, but I think that's a pretty far-fetched idea. It's not like the fish have the entire jellyfish genome stored away somewhere, only an extremely small portion of it meant to make them glow. A gene that isn't there can't be switched on, so if they were to have stingers they'd have to evolve that all by themselves

Or wait for the day when some company tries to release a genetically engineered pathogen that is more virulent but less deadly than a naturally occurring one, and it goes horribly wrong and we get killer bees (figuratively speaking).

Now that is a more realistic and frightening idea. Virii are extremely fast evolving, so it's a little scary to think about what could happen if we were to play around with that too much. It's very possible that a genetically engineered virus meant to be non-contagious could evolve to be so. They say AIDs has the potential to go airborne in a few decades, you know.

OK, so we do that to all babies in N America, and no one there ever gets sickle-cell anaemia again. Still a good idea?

Couldn't happen, since sickle-cell does occur via random mutation sometimes, but I see your point

In the EU, if a food contains or consists of genetically modified organisms (GMOs), or contains ingredients produced from GMOs, this must be indicated on the label. I don’t know if that’s the case in the States? Over here in the UK, GM foods are in a small minority and we do not need to pay a premium to avoid them in my experience.

Like Dorkhedeos said, there's no such requirement in the States. I'd be willing to wager that a large percentage of our foods are genetically modified here, they just look far too "perfect". I've traveled overseas quite a bit, and apples are never quite so perfectly round, pears are lumpy rather than smooth... you get the picture. I gotta tell ya, fruit in Italy may look less brightly coloured and perfectly shaped than here, but it sure tastes a hell of a lot better!