Medical Equipment Design

Mum, Mum...
Can I have a fourescent Marmoset?
No dear...Go and play with that nice luminous squirrel.

Del

They'll start with the more familiar ;

All this glow-in-the-dark stuff has been going for a while now...

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2002/01/0111_020111genmice.html

http://news.bbc.co.uk/cbbcnews/hi/animals/newsid_3504000/3504618.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/4605202.stm

Just wait until those wacky Americans want a real exclusive designer pet. 'Exotic' won't be enough, they'll want to mod the thing and somebody somewhere will take their money to do it.

A glow in the dark acorn might be handy.

What exactly would primate phosphorescence have to do with understanding human diseases? I'll admit that I know little about disease research but am I missing something?

I do understand that primates are our closest genetic match in the animal kingdom, but what's the difference if they glow in the dark or not? I mean if you are trying to show that traits pass from one generation to the next, well we already figured that part out.

Ultimately what will come of this is a desire for multicolored, glow in the dark pets for the rich and ignorant. It'll be the next reality show

It is highly dangerous and unfair to play with genetics of any natural thing. The nature will get disturbed and human race will be in problem ultimately

We better be careful. One wrong genetic slip and the monkeys may end up smarter than us.

Too late...
They don't work 9 to 5
Del

I have a friend working as a member of the human genome project and these things are very much breakthroughs! It is not the luminescent gene that is important in this case, it is that they can take the gene from one animal and add it to another.

Wouldn't it be great if we found the gene in some animal that prevents them from getting say Cancer, and placing this in an individual with a genetic predisposition to it!

Yes, I agree that making an animal luminescent is somewhat pointless, but what they have proven is that they can pass on a (very easily observed) gene to the next generation. I also agree that the field is very dangerous, with no knowledge of the ramifications for the gene tampering in the next few generations; this is precisely why this research needs to occur; and I'm sorry if others feel differently, but I feel animals are a better choice for testing than humans.