Last night I watched and will again view a program with the interesting Title “Animal Pharm.” The purpose of this continuing program is to show us the pros and cons of Genetically Modifying animals and plants for the benefit of humans both within the food and medical fields.
In the first program, it was clear that the information was straight from the source ie those using transgenetic and cross breeding to produce creatures whose very existance was for our benefit. Well the images I saw were totally horrid. I did take the initial stance of lets see what they have to say, whats this about and keeping an open mind, lets see what the buzz is about both for and against.
Well I was taken aback from the images shown and the scienctists attitude to the experiments forced onto these animals for example:
Cross Breeding cattle to give what they termed ‘double muscle’ beef. Sounds odd yes, but picture a cow/bull with Mr Universe style muscle..
The sight of this monsterous creature and the way its legs appeared to be meer stumps under its bulk, left me with a feeling of extreme pity.
Should we doing this?
Do we have the right to treat animals like this?
These creatures are being exploited.
It is true! Yes they are for the most part being treated well, ie good food, shelter, etc but they are being exploited in ways far to extreme for many of us to comprehend.
From their very conception. Their existance is being manipulated, their genetics, their DNA, the very things which make them them and none of these creatures actually have a say in the matter.
Why make Rabbits which Glow in the dark:
This is for medical research.
Once again animals are being used by humans, exploited for our own needs with no consideration of should we.
How about growing replacement body parts on animals. This you may well think is the stuff of science fiction, but you would be wrong.
Designer parts, grown to order for your vanity needs. I wonder what this mouse would say if only it could.
There comes a time when people and Scientists need to step back and ask themselves
SHOULD WE!
Is this ETHICAL?
With all the Scientific and Technological advancements in modern times you would think we would have developed a more ethical approach to experiments after all that is what we are doing.
Taking a creature who has no real way of deciding, argreeing, consenting or understanding what is happening to it, and changing its DNA, its very cells, giving them diseases, making strange things grow off them, removing and adding body parts and using these creatures in everyway shape and form imaginable and I think in several ways we simply could not.
Here are a few questions for you, after all the experiments are said and done, what are the risks to us Humans?
If we eat Genetically modified meat will in a few generations this in someway affect our children, grand children etc?
If these genetically altered creatures get out into environment and somehow breed will we have mice with ears growing on their backs running around in sheds or glowing rabbits in our fields?
These Questions I have yet to read, hear and see an answer too which convinces me it is safe.
Your thoughts….
I Want To Breathe 
Actually, the fluorescent rabbit, Alba, was for art, not medical research. And that mouse had an ear implanted on its back – no genetic modification there (that I’m aware of).
Now, as for their existence being manipulated – we do that all the time. Why, we can’t ask an animal (or a person for that matter) if they would like to come into existence. You didn’t consent to be born. You didn’t choose your parents, nor what genes you got. So why should it be any different if we breed animals asking them if they’d like to be born, and give them genes that they didn’t ask for? Not even humans get this choice.
LikeLike
I need to correct you on two counts Joshua….
The glowing rabbits are for a scientific experiment in which they take a gene from Jellyfish which has a florescence and insert into the cells of the rabbit… this will be they hope be used in tracing the paths of tumors, and blockages amongst other things….. and the mouse was not implanted it was grown in early stem cell research…
There is a natural selection process as far genes go whith all creatures …. the creatures do not get a choice in the process it is done to them, not for them… for our own needs not theirs
LikeLike
I need to clarify my statements, because they need no correction.
The picture of the green rabbit displayed above is artist Eduardo Kac’s bunny Alba. However, it is certainly far more common to make transgenic animals (such as those expressing fluorescent proteins) for medical purposes, rather than artistic reasons.
Also, the ear was grown from bovine cartilage cells seeded onto a degradable ear-shaped scaffold, which was implanted under the skin of the mouse’s back.
LikeLike
thanks mate…..
the whole process of using animals its a total disgrace… I dont understand why we think we have the right to do this…
LikeLike
My personal instinct is to leave animals be. Why can’t we experiment on humans if we need to find cures or test hypothesis. That’s not moral. However, if I had a sick child and testing on animals could save him or her, I’m not sure I wouldn’t change my mind.
Dagny
http://www.onnotextiles.com
bamboo and organic clothing
LikeLike
We have been exploiting and deliberately modifying farm animals and crops for thousands of years through selective breeding. We allow those with characteristics we find favourable to breed and destroy the rest. This is a slower process, but it achieves the same goal. Ancient horses were little more than ponies. Cattle have become more docile and produce more milk. Cultivated grains produce much larger seeds and in excessive quantities, far more that they require to reproduce. Most domesticated animals have been so radically modified that they can no longer survive in the wild. I am not debating the morality of this, simply pointing out that it has been going on for a long time, and if you wish to be consistent you will have to condemn thousands of years of agriculture as well and go back to being a hunter-gatherer.
LikeLike
Should you also shun the enslavement of yeast cells to make beer? I mean trillions of hapless little cells, forced under anaerobic (we cruelly cut the oxygen supply to them) conditions to ferment genetically modified or selectively bred vegetation in order to produce alcohol. Then once they finish making the alcohol, their yeasty bodies die a cruel, horrible death in their own alcoholic wastes. How is this any different?
Say no to forcing organisms to work for our benefit? As Peter Grant already brought up, if you turn your back on biotechnology, than you should also turn your back on beer, flour, grain, chickens, cows, yogurt and even your family pet. It’s neither good nor bad nor otherwise, but the foundation of humanity is based on technological advances that are also biologically based. Let’s start with the creation of bread and move from there, shall we?
Understand that when you say no to the technology that gives you the quality of life that you live, also think that it is the same technology that gives you things like flu vaccinations, insulin, and innovative chemotherapies. What is more ethical? The lives of bacteria, or the life of a family member?
The current regulations are that govern scientific research are pretty good at preventing “mad scientists” from going off the deep end and overlooking an animal’s welfare and well being. In the US, research is heavily regulated, and most researchers are not these power-hungry crazed people that you may envision. Science fiction is not real science. Before coming to too many conclusions, understand the technology behind it first. (Like, it’s impossible for mice with ears to breed more mice with ears because of the way it’s done, as aussiecynic pointed out.)
LikeLike
I ask this sincerely, if you’re concerned about animal rights do you still eat meat? We can talk all we want about treating animals this way or that. But until we change our lifestyle that’s all it is, talk.
LikeLike