The Neiswanger Institute for Bioethics at Loyola University

About those glow in the dark cats

As Kelly posted earlier, the South Koreans have cloned cats with RFP genes. A side-effect is that the cats glow under ultraviolet light. Sure, there's probably a legitimate scientific reason for these experiments (it proves that the manipulated gene was passed on to the clone), but the cynic in me wonders if there isn't another motive. GloFishPerhaps the researchers' retirement accounts will now be funded by revenue generated by consumers who just have to have a glowing cat as a pet. What could be more hip? Skeptical? Did you know you can buy genetically altered zebra fish that glow in lots of different florescent colors from your local PetCo? The one exception is California where those left coasters seem to think that using the awesome powers of genetics ought to be used for less frivolous purposes. Hm.

-Andrea Kalfoglou

photo: GloFish.com

Earlier on blog.bioethics.net:
+ Transgenic fish bust in New Zealand

comments

It is the commercialization of such "designer pets" that bothers me about this. Coming from a negative utilitarian standard (avoid doing harm), this development appears frivolous, potentially harmful, and disrespectful to the dignity of animals. We are treating them like robots or a product rather than as a living being with needs and an interest in being treated humanely. I worry about the shifts in how we will view animals in the wake of this "new exciting feature!" and what that will inspire in us as we find ourselves unable to understand more while still maintaining respect for the dignity of life.

I am allergic to pet dander (dogs and cats), and love cats dearly. But I cannot bring myself to consider a "made to order" hypoallergenic cat - such a "feature" brings no benefit to the cat itself and could hold potential dangers for it.

contribute a comment

Your contributions to the conversation are very much appreciated. We do have a few simple guidelines, though. Be civil. Stay on topic. We reserve the right to remove comments that violate the aforementioned guidelines. One more thing: comments are moderated, so it may take a little while for your comment to be posted. Thanks.

what is this?

A 'Nature Top 50' science blog by the editors, staff and friends of The American Journal of Bioethics. Science writes: "To follow the latest twists in ... science stories with social impact, dive into this Web log"

The original story behind this blog

What people are saying about blog.bioethics.net

recently on blog.bioethics.net

Run Away from the Border?

I too want to praise Yum! Brand Foods, right along with the Association of State and Territorial Public Health Officials for its commitment to put... (more)

Something to Declare...But No One Cares

Disclosing financial conflicts of interest to potential research subjects does not effect their willingness to participate in research, found a recent Johns Hopkins, Duke, and... (more)

Lowering the Exercise Bar, Raising the Numbers on the Scale?

Last week, the DHHS changed the guidelines for physical activity from 30 minutes of moderate activity 5 days a week to just a total of... (more)

Caplan Asks Whether Genetic Tests Are Worth The Price

Last week in his MSNBC column, Art Caplan asks whether breast cancer genetic tests are worth the price or whether biotech companies are cashing in... (more)

Truckers Save Us in a Pandemic

Who should get priority in a pandemic? Some say healthcare workers; some say the garbage collector. But according to one Johns Hopkins study, says the... (more)

this blog's feed

  • Subscribe
    • XML
    • Google Reader or Homepage
    • Add to My Yahoo!
    • Subscribe with Bloglines
    • Subscribe in NewsGator Online
    • Add to My AOL
    • Convert RSS to PDF
    • Add to Technorati Favorites!
    • Add to your phone
    • Get RSS Buttons

info

archives

tags