California to ban the sale of "GloFish"

[John_Brandt]

There is an existing law in California that does not allow the free distribution of GM fish. That law even restricts bona-fide research with GM fish if it cannot be shown that they are safe to the environment. The pre-existing law is not ethically-grounded - it demands scientific efforts to show that the fish are safe.

The vote that occured was about whether this fish should be allowed an exception to the law. My suggestion that California does not need ethical reasons to ban the sale of this fish was was meant to say that there are scientific reasons why they could support a ban (actually just enforce an already existing ban).

As I said before, I'm undecided on the ethics of GM. I think that some potential kinds of, and motivations for GM might be unethical.

I do disagree that there are no ethical differences between selective breeding and GM. The difference is one of degrees and kind of power. GM produces organisms that selective breeding cannot. GM could be used to create biological weapons (intentional or accidental) that selective breeding could not.

 

[reefann]

I will prolly buy a few when I set up my planted tank. I see no ethical issues.
I see potential for problems down the though. IE resident evil.
LOL
JJ
_________________
how to make hash
_________________
Mercedes 300D

 

[John_Brandt]

I have this vision of a small outdoor pond in a warm climate, protected from predators and filled with these glowing fish. I imagine this pond at night. Especially at night. Can you picture dozens of colorful glowing jewels darting about in the blackness?

 

[Wheeldog63]

Here is my 2 cents on this topic, first off, the LFS I work for got about 2 dozen of these in this last week, they are WAY over priced, we are sellign them for soemthing like 8 bucks a piece, and secondly they are NOT as cool as that picture protrays them as, they are just faintly red and a lot of them have what appears to be some major problems geneticly, although we did maybe just get bottom of the barrell, although they come through 2 differant suppliers. I just think these are going to be a MAJOR flub in the pet industry they are not as cool as I was expecting and quite frankly am dissapointed in their appearance, I won't get into the GM part of this because I could rant for days on end.

 

[John_Brandt]

Hmmm....

It's interesting to hear that the LFS you work at got these fish to sell last week. All of the press releases specifically say that they will go on sale January 5, 2004. This is mentioned as if it were the theater release date of a new Hollywood blockbuster movie. I'm very surprised that they are already being traded.

Articles have mentioned that they will retail for about $5 each. I suspect that the company that developed and is marketing the GloFish has done consumer surveys to try to determine what people would pay for these fish.

Wheeldog63, where is your store and where did they get the fish from?

 

[Wheeldog63]

I was as suprised as you were on them being available, I didn't think they would be available after the 5th either. Our store is just a little shop in Muncie, IN that goes by G & M Pet and Garden. We got our stock through 2 differant suppliers one is called Wilson and is located somewhere over in IL, although I am not sure where, the otehr I believe was SunPet and is located out of Alanta. I will try and get a picture of these guys to prove I am not just feedin ya'll crap :lol: But to be honest the ones we got in I am VERY disapointed in and am wondering why some of them are kinda freakish, may just of been a bad order.

 

[John_Brandt]

WD63,

Yes, I know Wilson Pet and Sun Pet. You may be right that what your store got was what was left after the best ones were taken. If you've seen tanks full of "normal" zebra danios at the wholesalers you will notice a small percentage that have what appears to be genetic "defects". Usually the problems are spine deformities and weird misshapen fins.

Try putting an Actinic light over the tank and see if that brightens them up.

It may be that these GM GloFish and "normal" zebras have similar defects. But I would expect the company to only send out perfect fish for their debut.

Zebra danios are not the only fish that have gotten the Glo treatment.

These are Medaka fish...

 

[John_Brandt]

Alright, now I've seen it all. There is a website for pets that glow. Does anyone remember the glowing GM rabbit that was created a few years ago?

If you're bored and want a few chuckles.....

http://www.glowingpets.com

Glow Zebra

 

[dwall174]

I agree that they should not be sold & California has the right idea to band them! They were originally altered to detect pollution in the water. They should remain for only research & scientific studies, The idea that they are offering a GM laboratory animal for sale as a pet is unreal! What’s next maybe a three-armed monkey or a five-legged dog?

 

[esmithiii]

I agree that they should not be sold & California has the right idea to band them! They were originally altered to detect pollution in the water. They should remain for only research & scientific studies, The idea that they are offering a GM laboratory animal for sale as a pet is unreal! What’s next maybe a three-armed monkey or a five-legged dog?

You eat GM food every day, and take medicines produced using GM technologies. Why are you so adamant about GM pets? If you are going to offer such an emotional response, at least take the time to offer a logical, thought-out argument as to why you think that they should be banned.

Ernie

 

[John_Brandt]

What’s next maybe a three-armed monkey or a five-legged dog?

A dog would want five legs anyway. That way he can scratch without having to stop walking. :wink:

A three-armed monkey? I'm not gonna tell you why a monkey would want a third arm.

Glow Monkey

 

[dwall174]

You eat GM food every day, and take medicines produced using GM technologies. Why are you so adamant about GM pets? If you are going to offer such an emotional response, at least take the time to offer a logical, thought-out argument as to why you think that they should be banned.

Ernie

I agree that we all have to eat GM food & take GM medicine. Mostly because of our Government (I won’t even go there!) I do understand that some of these GM foods & medicines are useful! However, I feel that most of the GM foods are just to make things grow bigger in less time so that there is more profit! Are current economy is totally derived around money & time, I feel that there are too many people that will sell you any thing & everything just for a buck now days! why give them the opportunity to start GM our pets!

 

[esmithiii]

I agree that we all have to eat GM food & take GM medicine. Mostly because of our Government (I won’t even go there!) I do understand that some of these GM foods & medicines are useful! However, I feel that most of the GM foods are just to make things grow bigger in less time so that there is more profit! Are current economy is totally derived around money & time, I feel that there are too many people that will sell you any thing & everything just for a buck now days! why give them the opportunity to start GM our pets!

You obviously aren't a farmer nor do you know any. There are almost no rich farmers these days. Most barely get by, and yes, those who use GM crops do earn more than those who do not, but the difference ends up in your pocket. The consumer benefits.

More food production in less time means more capacity to feed the hungry. Lower food costs translates directly into lower hunger rates. How can that be bad?

Of course our economy is based on money and time. Look up the definition of capitalism one of these days. It might shock you to learn that the pusuit of wealth is intended to be the driving force behind the economy.

You still haven't given me one reason why GM pets are bad. Put your thinking cap on and tell me why you don't like GM pets. You simply restated that you don't like it but you never gave a reason why. I am curious as to how you came to your opinion.

Ernie

 

[dwall174]

esmithiii

The reason these zebrafish were first altered! Was to help detect chemicals & pollution in our waterways! In addition, I don’t believe that they are any threat to our waters or environment.

I guess to summarize it for you I just think that it’s unethical for someone to GM a animal just to make money. I understand the need for scientific & health reasons, But not to just make a buck!

After all isn’t that’s what they’re doing with the cyanide caught fish! Just the quickest way to make a buck!

 

[Anonymous]

I keep remembering what my high school bio teacher would always say: "DNA is DNA is DNA...." The cells transcribing the proteins don't care what species the original DNA came from, they just make proteins based on the code.
John,
I truly wonder if any of the freakish examples you mentioned are even possible in a viable animal. Most of the toxins in animals that you mentioned are kept in specialized cells or organs to prevent autotoxicity, or the organism has some other type of immunity. Now, if a mouse were to transcribe a protein that produced dart frog poison, it would simply release the poison into every cell and kill the mouse at a very early age (and probably the pregnant female carrying the embryo as well). The same with the krill example. Having its cells produce cyanide is no different than injecting cyanide directly into the animal--it can't possibly live. I can't help but see the same things occurring with all your examples as well (except for the pirahna teeth ).

 

[John_Brandt]

Oh I agree with you Matt. I just had a bit of fun while making the point that GM creates an organism by crossing genetic boundaries that selective breeding cannot.

GloFish is a freshwater fish with a gene from a marine jellyfish. A vertebrate with an invertebrate gene. An instant "recombination" of genetic lineages long-since separated by hundreds of millions of years of evolution.

A few years ago there was a glowing GM rabbit created that had the same (I think) jellyfish gene. That's a terrestrial mammal with a marine invertebrate gene. Whoa!

Meet Alba....

http://www.wired.com/news/medtech/0,1286,54399,00.html

 

[John_Brandt]

In Reversal, FDA Says It Will Not Regulate Bioengineered Fish


The agency won't monitor GloFish, which go on sale Jan. 5 in every state but California.


By Kenneth R. Weiss
Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
December 10, 2003


The U.S. Food and Drug Administration, reversing an earlier decision to regulate all genetically altered animals, announced on Tuesday that it sees no need to scrutinize a tropical zebra fish bioengineered to glow red and headed for sale in pet stores next month.

A Texas-based company and a pair of tropical fish farms in Florida plan to market the trademarked GloFish beginning Jan. 5 in every state except California, which has banned all transgenic fish except in biomedical laboratories that can enssure the fish will not escape into the wild.

But the Food and Drug Administration said it had no concerns about the zebra fish, which is infused with a red fluorescent gene of a sea anemone, so that it seems to glow red under ultraviolet light.

"Because tropical aquarium fish are not used for food purposes, they pose no threat to the food supply," the FDA said in a terse statement.

"There is no evidence that these genetically engineered zebra danio fish pose any more threat to the environment than their unmodified counterparts which have long been widely sold in the United States," the FDA said. "In absence of a clear risk to the public health, the FDA finds no reason to regulate these particular fish."

The decision is a change of course for the agency, which more than a dozen years ago asserted that its Center for Veterinary Medicine had jurisdiction over genetically altered animals. It is currently evaluating the safety of an Atlantic salmon with designer genes to make it grow five times as fast as its natural cousins.

FDA Deputy Commissioner Lester M. Crawford told The Times this year that the agency's Center for Veterinary Medicine, would assert authority over the sale of all transgenic animals, including pet fish, under the U.S. Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act.

Some ecologists, conservationists and food-safety groups warn that the sale of this fish without rigorous scrutiny sets a worrisome precedent.

But Alan Blake, chief executive of Yorktown Technologies of Austin, Texas, the company marketing the GloFish, is delighted with the decision and said he plans to return to the California Fish and Game Commission in February to try again to win approval to sell the fish in the state.

The commissioners "cited ethical considerations in turning us down," Blake said. "We will be citing leading bioethicists from around the country to help us support the ethical basis for the sale of these fish."

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationw...ec10,1,5612236.story?coll=la-headlines-nation

 

[esmithiii]

esmithiii

The reason these zebrafish were first altered! Was to help detect chemicals & pollution in our waterways! In addition, I don’t believe that they are any threat to our waters or environment.

I guess to summarize it for you I just think that it’s unethical for someone to GM a animal just to make money. I understand the need for scientific & health reasons, But not to just make a buck!

After all isn’t that’s what they’re doing with the cyanide caught fish! Just the quickest way to make a buck!

All GM projects are started simply to "make a buck." You still haven't given me a reason why you think it is wrong. People breed and sell pets for money, and obviously you don't think it is wrong so why do you think it is unethical to GM an organism for profit?

John-
IMO, there are some very real and very serious dangers from the abuse of this technology, principally the ecological effects, primarily when dealing with competition and predation. I don't mean to minimize them, but I think that they are moot in this case. I have a hard time understanding what valid ethical issues are stake.

I am Christian in my belief system, and in spite of my (albeit limited)scientific training I believe in literal creationism, but I still don't see what people morally object to about this technology.

Ernie

 

[dwall174]

:mrgreen: Just expressing my opinion is all!

 

[esmithiii]

Doug-

Again, I don't have an issue with your opinion- I respect it. What I am asking for is more information as to why you feel that way. Is that too much to ask?

Ernie