They were obviously created because some in the fish breeding industry do not like the fact that a lot of hobbyists breed fish. The process for creating GloFish is legally protected and no one else can sell them wholesale or breed new ones except the company that created them. How convenient for them.
Most people are ignorant of the great variety of animals that exist in this world already. Do we really need to create new ones?
One could appreciate the variety of fish for ten life times without getting bored. There are over 25000 species of fish. We don't need to make hybrids.
I have 15 of them, and they are just as healthy as the rest of my Danios.
... None of mine are dull looking, and I do not have any "special lights" either. Trust me, if I the ones I saw when I bought them looked dull and plain... I wouldn't have bought them.
I don't care what people say about them, the same people grumble about Goldfish or other fish. Little do they know that just about every fish is inbred and/or mutants. It is sad, but that’s the facts.
I agree that if a fish is living in pain or in distress, they should be discouraged from sale. This isn't the case with Glofish.
And might I add... some of the very fish in people’s aquariums could be living of poorer quality of life, just because of how the have been bred. Cross breeding and inbreeding can cause the same problems.
... And as I said, most fish these days have been modified in some way.
Keep in mind these fish were NEVER actually used to detect pollution. The reason you see all the legal mumbo jumbo is because 5D Tropical is a law suit happy family operated business. They have sued former employees and countless others just because they could. I've had to deal with the 5D family several times and I thought them to be absolutely unbearable and refuse to do any business with them. Their facilities are nothing short of a fish concentration camp. If PETA ever got in there they would go absolutely crazy. They even have "seperate" bathrooms for the farm workers if you follow what I'm saying. Boycott this company every chance you get!
Well, while it may be easy to refer to something with crude words...and then not back ur opinion up - I think it's a good thing to try to learn as much as you can before coming to any kind of a conclusion.
If human kind didn't explore or experiment and just left nature 'the way it is' we would not evolve to the point where we have now. We would not have technology and our life spans would be considerably shorter.
I'm glad that we are striving to learn more and to advanced our capabilities. Humans now know how to genetically alter fish. This knowledge can now be applied to other areas/fields. This is a good thing. However, the bad aspect (which is part of human nature) is that we are now exploiting these fish and nature itself at a dangerous level. It's one thing to LEARN...it's another thing to use that knowledge and initiate mass production which will have negative results.
It is also human nature to improve ourselves and correct our mistakes. This is why if you are against GloFish - do not buy them. Educate people about them. Hopefully they will be banned from more and more places.
I think it would be nice to see the person who genetically altered the first dannio have the same done to them. I might even buy him to put on display if I had enough money.
I just read an article yesterday in a new publication about these fish and it totally changed my outlook on them. I think the biggest problem these fish have is their bad reputation because of their altered genes. Most people (me included) made a decision on assumptions and no facts. I still chose no in the poll but not for the reasons most people have. These fish were not developed for aquariums. they are being associated with painted glassfish and such which is a bad way of thinking about them. they were developed to aid scientists in monitoring waterways for pollution. the glow gene was set up in them so that they would glow only when in the presence of toxins. this "switch" was removed for the aquarium strain so that they would glow all the time but they are basically the same fish. Also, they can very possibly survive in the local waters as far as the water is concerned but the likelihood they would survive being a bright glowing tiny fish (like a fishing lure) in the presence of any predators is HIGHLY unlikely. fish are naturally camoflouged so they cannot be seen easily by predators (unless they are predators in which they want to attract prey). north american fish are rarely colorful and if they are, they are targets for larger fish. knowing the true story of the glowfish makes me understand their true purpose and buying them (if you like them) only helps with research. Since the fish were able to be produced for both aquariums and for scientific use, this drives down the costs of them which lowers the money spent to maintain our waterways. Boycotting the fish and giving them a bad reputation only hurts the scientific methods used. You havn't stopped the painted glassfish or "tropical fruit tetras". how are you gonna stop the latest craze? it's all about supply and demand and face it, we are the minority when it comes to retail fish sales as far as wal-mart and the big chains go. Most people want gimmick fish. most people want a betta in a cup or a goldfish in a bowl. why do you think they make so many of that type? anyway, I don't see a problem with glowfish. If you do, at least find this article and read it. It is on the newstand right now in one of the aquarium magazines. Kyle
SnakeSkinner - The fish were never actually used to detect any pollution. They were developed with that in mind, but never actually used which is why the scientist sold the recipe into the pet trade. The fish are altered by introducing the genes to the eggs themselves. It is theorized that if fish consume the escapees in the wild that their offspring will possess the mutation there by lowering the population of our wild species.
