| littlestar wrote: |
| HELL NO!!!
Look what tampering with the Human Species has Produced .... IF YOU DARE |
| angel wrote: |
| Nope. Fish sticks, mutant fish sticks...*shuddering*. Also the fact that just because they can doesn't mean that they should. Nature must progress or regress at it's own pace. Whether humans have been catalysts or not. There's been too much damage done by well-meaning officials as it is.
*giggle*Redneck vampires? Never knew there was such a thing. How funny. Guess I'd better be careful the next time I decide to visit the Wal-mart when it starts getting dark. *giggle*! |
| Cat wrote: |
| WASHINGTON - Papa salmon plus mama salmon equals ... baby trout? Japanese researchers put a new spin on surrogate parenting as they engineered one fish species to produce another, in a quest to preserve endangered fish.
Idaho scientists begin the next big step next month, trying to produce a type of salmon highly endangered in that state — the sockeye — this time using more plentiful trout as surrogate parents. The new method is "one of the best things that has happened in a long time in bringing something new into conservation biology," said University of Idaho zoology professor Joseph Cloud, who is leading the U.S. government-funded sockeye project. The Tokyo University inventors dubbed their method "surrogate broodstocking." They injected newly hatched but sterile Asian masu salmon with sperm-growing cells from rainbow trout — and watched the salmon grow up to produce trout. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070913/ap_ ... rom_salmon With so many different species going extinct, is this a good way to preserve them? Personally, I would rather see less human consumption, better protected habitats, etc. Should humans genetically engineer, or tamper with nature, to protect species? |
