Genetics gone wild

Maximus · Post by **Maximus** » Wed Jun 22, 2016 11:35 am

I was reading this the other evening and it reminded me of the bull as well. I watched a documentary previously on the bull, and these actually exist.

Why? Why? Why?

These pigs apparently had one gene manipulated, that's it. ONE. But I don't know how anyone else sees this, but the fact that one gene manipulated can have these massive characteristic changes (not to mention other changes) only reinforces my fear of humans and their need to dominant and control everything.

Check it out.

http://issues.org/32-3/perspective-super-muscly-pigs/

Then we have the bull one.

I believe there is even a cow with pigs skin? I just can't go there today. I have too much to do today.

Ok rant done.

Brebis · Post by **Brebis** » Wed Jun 22, 2016 12:23 pm

Double muscling in cattle is a naturally occurring trait and at least one breed, Belgian Blue, is doubled muscled. The Charolais has this trait in some of its lines and you see them quite often.

The problem with these cattle in particular is if the cow is double muscled they have difficulty calving so often must have a c section. If the bull was double muscled then it's likely there will be calving problems similar to if you use large breed bulls on small cows or first time heifers. Therefore, they require better management.

So, good in theory but not always practical....as for the pigs it will be interesting to see what happens. A lot of these developments don't pan out once they try and put it into commercial production.

kenya · Post by **kenya** » Sat Jun 25, 2016 5:25 pm

Oh That just looks ugly.

ross · Post by **ross** » Sat Jun 25, 2016 5:48 pm

Good steaks tho lol luck

Robbie · Post by **Robbie** » Sat Jun 25, 2016 10:00 pm

Don't forget Wendy the Whipett: Natural mutation! Poor dog.

kenya · Post by **kenya** » Sun Jun 26, 2016 12:13 am

Wow Never saw that before.

Skinny rooster · Post by **Skinny rooster** » Sun Jun 26, 2016 7:54 am

Belgian blues, so don't panic, it's selective breeding and not from some weird science experiment. Also this bull would be from some breeding station fed to show up to the maximum what they can do. Also he has been shaved in such a way to highlight his muscling. He won't look like that out in a field. They also have fertility problems with some of the bulls. This breed has been around a long time, we tried it back in the 80s. The calves are normal when born so we didn't have problems, they begin to muscle up after. Also to show that it's just genetics, there are certain breeds that you can't mix with it, the calves won't have the muscling, they will be normal.

Chicken Ninja · Post by **Chicken Ninja** » Sun Jun 26, 2016 8:05 am

It's crazy how much we as a society think we know about genetic material. And yet we want to genetically modify future children, despite little longterm reasearch into the possible repercussions.

Maximus · Post by **Maximus** » Sun Jun 26, 2016 8:26 am

We are an instant society. We just don't really do long term research. It is proving to have irreversible affects. I watched the documentary last night again, River Of Waste. I can become narotic when I see the damage we are doing on a massive scale, global scale. If we haven't already passed the tipping point we are teetering on the brink. When you see children dealing with cancer and dying as young as the age of 3, I just can't get my head wrapped around it. I'm just mentally consumed.

I watch this documentary and I'm back to feeling overhwlemed, wanting to protect my loved ones and myself. But how? Who am I compared to the Agri companies. I am nobody that's who i am. Nobody.

Post by **WLLady** » Sun Jun 26, 2016 10:58 am

So long term research needs time.....
Modern genetics (ie the transgenics field where we move a gene from one organism to another) has only been around for about 70 years-and it is still being learned about.

Transgenics has saved our bacon more than once....we can make loads of antibiotics for treating infections because we took that gene for making the compound and put it into an organism that grows rapidly so we can harvest enough for modern medicine....

Its not actual transgenics provedure that is dangerous. Once again, much like gun safety, its the person behind it that is the potential danger.

If we didnt create transgenics in my lab we would never know what a gene does. We find a mutation in a patient with disease...take the gene and put it into fruit flies or mice or culture cells (aka make a transgenic fruit fly) and study what changed....then we can extrapolate to the patient....and come up with treatments to help people with that mutation. So. Its not the genetics per se that is dangerous...its the potential of the person behind it. Without that technology a lot of us would not be here today-if you ever needed antibiotics....if you ever needed some treatments for arthritis or lupus...now they isolate bone morphogenic protein from transgenic bugs to put into people with fusions needed or bad bone breaks-to help the bone grow and heal..we have artificial blood that can be used in times of blood shortages....just a few examples of how transgenics are good. Mother nature makes genetic changes through mutation of dna....those get passed to kids that are fit enough to compete the ones without.....its the basis of evolution. And i have no idea where i was going with this....lol.