Fluorescent Monkeys Cast Light On Human Disease 174
Hugh Pickens writes "BBC reports that a team of Japanese scientists has integrated a new gene for green fluorescent protein into the common marmoset, causing them to glow green under ultraviolet light, creating second-generation, glow-in-the-dark monkeys in what could be a powerful new tool in human disease research. Though primates modified to generate a glowing protein have been created before, these are the first to keep the change in their bloodlines. If a fluorescent protein gene can be introduced into the monkey genome and passed onto future generations, other genes could be too opening up a world of possibilities for medical research, such as the generation of specific monkey colonies containing genetic defects that mirror human diseases aiding efforts to cure such diseases as Alzheimer's and Parkinson's disease. However many people are likely to find the routine use of monkeys in medical research far less acceptable than that of rodents, drawing action from animal rights activists. 'I'm worried that these steps are being taken without any overall public discussion about whether we want to go down that road. We may find ourselves gradually drifting towards the genetic engineering of human beings,' says Dr David King, from the group Human Genetics Alert. '"Slippery slope" is a quite inadequate description of the process, because it doesn't happen passively. People push it forward.'"
Just a matter of time (Score:4, Interesting)
So, how long do you think it'll be before decedents of these 'somehow' hit the exotic pet trade.
Re:Oh no, not human genetic engineering! (Score:5, Interesting)
There's also the world of... Brave New World.
By unfortunate genetic lottery, we have people suited to manual labor, manufacturing and other undesirable jobs. In addition, we dehumanize people if they're "designed." Think about the problems we have when clothing/electronics/houses go out of style. Now think about your kids. Do you want them to "go out of style?" We'll only further objectify people.
Sure, it sucks if you're ugly. But at least you're unique.
Re:Fluorescent monkeys? Bah (Score:4, Interesting)
Well it makes all the difference in the world if you're dieting. If you were phosphorescent, you could eat a tub of ice cream and just shine the calories away. Try doing that if you're just fluorescent.
Re:Fluorescent monkeys? Bah (Score:3, Interesting)
Wrong "Slippery Slope" (Score:3, Interesting)
"I'm worried that these steps are being taken without any overall public discussion about whether we want to go down that road. We may find ourselves gradually drifting towards the genetic engineering of human beings," says Dr David King, from the group Human Genetics Alert. "'Slippery slope' is a quite inadequate description of the process, because it doesn't happen passively. People push it forward."
This research may some day influence the manipulation of the human genome, but the same reasoning would apply to the current generation of fluorescent fish and bunnies. If your concern runs that deep, you might as well ban animal husbandry.
What bugs me about messing with primate genes is that they're already so close to us genetically that turning a few genes on or off would make them anthropomorphic analogues. In other words, we're making them men, but they lack the legal capacity, rights and protections that we take for granted.
For those of you with refined literary tastes, yes. I'm thinking of that Heinlein story, "Jerry Was a Man."
Re:Oblig... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Oh no, not human genetic engineering! (Score:5, Interesting)
Wild parsnips can be turned into 'normal' parsnips after about a dozen generations.
It just seems like the right thing to do: find a nice plant that shows all the characteristic I'm after, collect the seeds, cool, sow, rince and repeat. Maybe one day I can get one named after me.