Bio-Cats

Articfox · **Posted:** Wed Oct 27, 2004 4:26 pm

Quote:

(CNN) -- A California biotechnology company has started taking orders for a hypoallergenic cat for pet lovers prone to allergies.

The genetically engineered feline, which is expected to be available from 2007, is the first in a planned series of lifestyle pets, Los Angeles-based Allerca said in a press release.

Allerca hopes to attract customers among the millions of people worldwide who suffer from cat allergies.

Up to 10 percent of the U.S. population alone are believed to be prone to symptoms that can affect the eyes, nose, ears, throat, lungs and skin.

Many cat lovers ignore medical advice and discomfort and choose to keep the animals as pets, or use expensive medications to cope with their allergies.

Cat allergen is also one of the main causes of childhood allergies, asthma and other respiratory diseases such as bronchitis.

Cat allergies are caused by a potent protein secreted by the cat's skin and salivary glands. The allergen is so small it can remain airborne for months.

Using "gene silencing" technology, Allerca is able to suppress the production of the protein.

The first breed of hypoallergenic cats will be British Shorthairs, which are considered to be ideal pets with friendly, playful and affectionate personalities.

Allerca expects the first kittens to be born in early 2007 and is already accepting $250 deposits from interested customers.

Allerca president Simon Brodie told The Associated Press that he ultimately hopes to sell 200,000 of the cats annually at $3,500 each in the United States.

Brodie said the cats would be spayed and neutered to prevent breeding with naturally born animals.

He also said he didn't expect to have any problems with federal regulators after neither the U.S. Department of Agriculture nor the Food and Drug Administration objected to the creation of a genetically-engineered pet fish because it wasn't meant for human consumption

The GloFish, which went on sale in pet stores earlier this year, is a zebra fish implanted with a fluorescent sea anemone gene.

"As long as people don't start eating cats and they don't enter the food chain, then we should be handled like the GloFish," Brodie told the AP.

The genetic-engineered cat is the latest attempt to apply biotechnology to the lucrative pet industry.

In August, Genetic Savings & Clone -- another Californian company -- announced that it had successfully cloned two kittens from a one-year-old female Bengal cat and said it could clone anyone's pet for around $50,000.

In my opinion this is weird and un-natural, if your that allergic to cats then maybe you should do with out one. Altering animals for the sake of human enjoyment isn't right in my opinion.

Qanda · **Posted:** Wed Oct 27, 2004 4:31 pm

I don't like it too. "Genetically engineered"... sounds terrible to use that term on a living creature if you ask me.

Ammer · **Posted:** Wed Oct 27, 2004 4:32 pm

That's odd as well. It sounds like they tested on various feline's until one actually met with their standards.

shapu · **Posted:** Wed Oct 27, 2004 4:41 pm

It seems like it would be cheaper, even over the long run, to just buy a normal cat and a giant box of Sudafed.

Kitten Medli · **Posted:** Wed Oct 27, 2004 6:11 pm

.......

That is just.. Oh. My. Word.

People have NO right to do that in my opinion!!!!!!!!

ahoteinrun · **Posted:** Wed Oct 27, 2004 7:14 pm

I am curious about this process, but I have this weird feeling that they don't hurt the cats.
I know that they're gene splicing spider silk genes... into goats, and they can now produce silk 1/100th of the strength of spiders silk from goats milk. It's odd. But they don't harm the animal when doing it (at least... this is what the Discovery channel would have me to believe).

Humans have been altering animals for a very long time. Look at all the different breeds of dogs that we're breeding, so many of which have horrific health issues. German Shepherds and Golden Retreivers have hip dysplasia. Dogs with short noses like Bulldogs and pugs have breathing problems. Dogs with wrinkles get skin infections.
These aren't natural genetic makeups of dogs. This is a coupld thousand of years of dog breeding.
We've made them smaller, like teacup poodles. We've made them giants like Great Danes.
In horses too. We have fallabella ponies and mini horses. And then we have massive creatures like clydesdales. All breeding.
This genetic modification IMO is just a faster way to get what we want, and in a different form. It's things like this, that I believe will help people fight certain diseases in the future. So i'm not exactly against the whole process, as long as nothings in pain, tied to a table and screaming... or suffering (and despite what people say, you can tell if an animal is suffering or in pain. It's not that hard to figure out.) I don't have a problem with it.
We've been doing it for years.
Do you really think that most breeds of dogs now adays could survive without people? Some could, sure, the hunting breeds, and even then, how well do you think they could cope to where we've put them?

So finally after all of what i've said. Meh.
I'm not for it, i'm not against it, and i'm waiting to see what will happen in the future.

(And i've known about this cat thing for awhile. It's been in the news up here in Canada for a few years now.)

Quote:

People have NO right to do that in my opinion!!!!!!!!

I like how everything is going to be done in 2007.. *cough* (You won't get it unless you have a bit of Christian knowledge.)

And what pray tell would this "bit of Christian Knowledge" be. I have some christian knowledge, but i'm curious as to whats going to happen in the future.

*suddenly reminded of Y2K*

Sapphire Faerie · **Posted:** Wed Oct 27, 2004 7:51 pm

I think it's kind of a good thing...
I'd rather see cats "bred" to not cause allergic reactions in humans, than for cats to be bred to be flat faced, and long haired, for some rediculous notion called 'beauty' which just leaves the cat unhealthy, because it can't breath, and its choking on it's hairballs.
Now, just get me a hairless cat (Sphinx) and I won't even have to deal with cat hair on my clothing.

And I must agree with Inrun... 2007? I think I have quite a handle on Christian knowledge, but this I've never heard of.
But perhaps you should tell Inrun and I in PM, rather than here, especially if it's something that could launch a religious debate, and none of us need that... Meaning: This thread is about cats, if you wish to debate about something else, we have a user group for that. Just thought I'd get that out of the way before anything starts up.

shapu · **Posted:** Wed Oct 27, 2004 8:07 pm

ahoteinrun wrote:

I am curious about this process, but I have this weird feeling that they don't hurt the cats.

No, the cats aren't harmed.

What happens is that single cell, called a zygote, is taken from a test tube right after sperm and eggs are mixed from cats (two different cats, obviously).

Then a retrovirus, which is a type of virus that permanently rewrites DNA, is mixed in with the zygotes - the retrovirus will infect the zygotes, and insert a new section of DNA into the normal cat DNA, just before the location of the gene that produces the allergy-causing protein. The new section is basically a "skip this section!" alarm, which causes the allergy-causing protein to not be expressed where it normally would.

Then the zygotes are separated and inserted into the uterus of a healthy female cat, just like test tube babies in people, and with any luck, some of them will "take," allowing for the birth of genetically-modified critters.

This is basically just an advancement of the normal selective breeding that we've been putting cats, dogs, cows, sheep, whatever, through for the last 10,000 years or so.

One note,though: I don't think that the company is taking into consideration that generally when an animal creates a specific protein, it's because it's important. I'm not a big fan of switching off proteins that are so prevalent that they're expressed in every skin cell and hair follicle - that seems like it's going to be a big change.

I know this forum may not even exist in 2017, when the first cats will be 10 years old, but mark my words -- these cats will have problems that the company creating them simply doesn't forsee. They'll have skin problems, or tooth problems, or digestive issues. I'm not trying to be a doomsayer, but I will always prefer the simple solution: Buy some freaking benadryl.

Yoshi · **Posted:** Wed Oct 27, 2004 11:51 pm

Mm...genetically modified cats, eh? After all the facts about GM foods my sister's been telling me, I'm pretty much anti-GM anything. But...as long as they're preventing them from breeding with natural born animals (after all these problems about GM foods spreading their pollen and wiping out most of the organic foods out there, causing almost all the food we eat to be GM'ed), I'm okay with it. Sure, it may seem kind of immoral, but that's technology for ya.

Kitten Medli wrote:

(You won't get it unless you have a bit of Christian knowledge.)

As I'm a Christian myself, I'd also like to see what you mean by this (but in no means am I trying to spark up a religious debate).

Fiddelysquat · **Posts:** 2476 **Joined:** Mon May 31, 2004 9:18 pm

First they'll make custom cats, then it'll be custom babies. I don't like the sound of this at all.

Hil · **Posted:** Thu Oct 28, 2004 12:24 am

I disagree with it, but maybe with this, less cats will be homeless.

Kitten Medli · **Posted:** Thu Oct 28, 2004 1:14 am

From what a seriously smart preacher on TV says, the rapture will happen in 2007 or 2017.

No more than this. Sorry if I started something. I'll probably edit that out of my post to keep this off of religious matters.

I'm with you Fiddelysquat.. seems like things are going in such a direction of that. (Custom babies.)

Moonlight Flower · **Posts:** 650 **Joined:** Wed Oct 27, 2004 2:35 pm

I.. honestly don't mind. I know many people who have had problems with cat allergies, but would simply love to keep one as a pet. I don't think this is really all that bad, although the first batches of kittens probably won't last too long due to some problem or another.

I just wonder if the kittens will be able to breed normally with other cats. I mean, that'd make for a very strange stray cat situation.... we have enough wild cats as it is. ~_~

Sapphire Faerie · **Posted:** Thu Oct 28, 2004 3:25 am

Moonlight Flower wrote:

I just wonder if the kittens will be able to breed normally with other cats. I mean, that'd make for a very strange stray cat situation.... we have enough wild cats as it is. ~_~

Articfox wrote:

Quote:

Brodie said the cats would be spayed and neutered to prevent breeding with naturally born animals.

Also, something interesting. My family always had pet cats growing up, and my sister loved cats. She even took the oldest family cat with her to get her Senior pictures made for school.
But after she went away to college, and then got her own apartment, she was barely around cats, and developed an allergy to them during that time. It's a pity for her, because she still loves cats.

Moonlight Flower · **Posts:** 650 **Joined:** Wed Oct 27, 2004 2:35 pm

Ah, I missed that.

But yeah, I would hate myself if I developed an allergy to cats. I think this would definately make the lives of people who can't normally have cats better.

Pink Poogle Toy Forum

Bio-Cats

Who is online