hypoallergenic cats go on sale in US

[Karmashock]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/5375900.stm

Basically these cats have been specifically bred to not have a protein that causes irritation in some humans... I love this crap... next they have to figure out how to make pets live a little longer... little bastards go about 10 to 15 years and then get all smelly and bloated...

[NeBuLaDiStOrTiOn]

That's mean. I don't care that much because it's cat's though.. and I'm allergic to them. :D So, it's a good thing. I still wouldn't want a cat.. they are so lazy and boring. I hope they don't do the same to dogs.

[Karmashock]

neb neb neb... all they did was selectively breed cats together to get a trait they wanted. That's not mean at all.


Every domesticated cat AND dog breed has been BRED by human beings. Oh sure, most of them were bred like that quiet some time ago... in some cases over 5000 years ago... but regardless humans did it. Most of the dogs were bred to be hunting dogs of some description... and the cats have been bred for all kinds of different looks... some have pug noses... some have almost no hair... some have lots of hair...


all breds designed by humans.

Is this mean?
Over the last 10,000 years or so humans turned this
http://www.queticofoundation.org/gallery/wolf.jpg
into this:
http://django.dj.funpic.org/pug.jpg
It way more mean then just breeding out a protein that cats don't even need.

The amazing thing is that htey're still genetically compatible...

I mean this...
http://www.loredane.com/Oscar%20Images/Oscarmatchett.jpg
can impregnate this:
http://www.cnn.com/US/9802/17/dog.show/link.toy.poodle.jpg
and yet somehow produce genetically viable offspring... just f'ing weird.

[Compeador]

Now they need to breed cats that vacuum the floor, do my laundry, wash the dishes, walk the dog, and cooks dinner. Then maybe MAYBE I'll like cats. Maybe.






Fuckin selfish pricks.

[Quietus]

That's mean. I don't care that much because it's cat's though.. and I'm allergic to them. :D So, it's a good thing. I still wouldn't want a cat.. they are so lazy and boring. I hope they don't do the same to dogs.

They are breeding them so you will no longer be allergic. It isn't genetic engineering or some crazy shit, it's just selective breeding. My parents took part in this heavily with Great Danes, like you see in the picture karma posted.

And no karma, we didn't turn wolves into pugs.

[Karmashock]

And no karma, we didn't turn wolves into pugs.
I'm pretty sure we did... Obviously there is a lot of time inbetween and many sub breeds between... but I think the origional "dog" was a pack animal like a wolf and ALL sub breeds came from it. Considering that a pug clearly didn't evolve naturally it could then be said that humans bred a wolf like animal into pugs over the course of thousands of years.


You think I'm wrong? Tell me why.

[Quietus]

Easiest answer is a wolf is defined as canis lupus, dog as canis familiaris. The genus origin is supposedly around 15,000 years ago, with all of the current breeds of dog being manmade, using a primitive form of the dog, and breeding it with various other canids, including the wolf. But even then, we are using a wild, possible wolf like animal to do most of the breeding, with wolves mixed in (along with other relatives, jackals, foxes, and the like). So, my statement of And no karma, we didn't turn wolves into pugs. is true, we did not directly turn wolves into pugs. They share almost no characteristics. But yes, they likely used other canids.

But maybe I just took your original statement too literally, and you were using it as a general example of what we have done as humans regarding pets?

[Karmashock]

Easiest answer is a wolf is defined as canis lupus, dog as canis familiaris. The genus origin is supposedly around 15,000 years ago, with all of the current breeds of dog being manmade, using a primitive form of the dog, and breeding it with various other canids, including the wolf. But even then, we are using a wild, possible wolf like animal to do most of the breeding, with wolves mixed in (along with other relatives, jackals, foxes, and the like). So, my statement of is true, we did not directly turn wolves into pugs. They share almost no characteristics. But yes, they likely used other canids.

But maybe I just took your original statement too literally, and you were using it as a general example of what we have done as humans regarding pets?
Are you telling me that you can cross breed foxes with wolves? I honestly have no idea as to whether that would work or not... but I'm pretty sure it wouldn't... after all... foxes are seperate species to the other canines... which means by definition you can't cross breed them.


And even in your own version you're still saying that the pug has wolf ancestors that were turned to their current form through human meddling.


What's more this "primitve" dog we started the breed from would almost certainly be a wolflike animal... the furr might be different but they would be wild pack hunters that were very much the same to wolves.

And that was my point... that the perversion of taking wild pack hunters and turning them into drooling impractical pets that fixate upon a single human master and who's form is designed almost entirely to generate that "awww cute" factor in humans is far far far great perversion then doing the comparitively moderate alteration of filtering out a protein that causes allergies.

[Quietus]

Are you telling me that you can cross breed foxes with wolves? I honestly have no idea as to whether that would work or not... but I'm pretty sure it wouldn't... after all... foxes are seperate species to the other canines... which means by definition you can't cross breed them.


And even in your own version you're still saying that the pug has wolf ancestors that were turned to their current form through human meddling.


What's more this "primitve" dog we started the breed from would almost certainly be a wolflike animal... the furr might be different but they would be wild pack hunters that were very much the same to wolves.

And that was my point... that the perversion of taking wild pack hunters and turning them into drooling impractical pets that fixate upon a single human master and who's form is designed almost entirely to generate that "awww cute" factor in humans is far far far great perversion then doing the comparitively moderate alteration of filtering out a protein that causes allergies.

My whole point is we did not turn wolves into pugs. We used a primitive form of the wild dog, and the wolf was used in some breeds, but not a pug. Most of the perversion you are speaking of, making something like a pug, is a minority. Many dog breeds we have today were bred for specific tasks in the past. Most were not impractical pets designed for cute factor, they were tools for man, and pets secondary. Today we do not need them for their utility, so they are relegated to an "aww cute" role.

The fox, wolf, wild dogs, domesticated dogs, and others are all part of the Canid family, they share a lot. Pugs and Wolves don't share much of what is in that pool, though.

[Karmashock]

My whole point is we did not turn wolves into pugs. We used a primitive form of the wild dog, and the wolf was used in some breeds, but not a pug.
You do know that any primative wild dog would be so like a wolf general as to be practically identicle right?

Wild pack dogs... clearly there were no wild foofy toy poodles out there.

Most of the perversion you are speaking of, making something like a pug, is a minority.
Never said it wasn't... just pointed out that all the domesticated species have been SERIOUSLY fucked with.
Many dog breeds we have today were bred for specific tasks in the past. Most were not impractical pets designed for cute factor, they were tools for man, and pets secondary. Today we do not need them for their utility, so they are relegated to an "aww cute" role.

and how is that less of a perversion?


My point remains that we've fucked with these animals a WHOLE lot more then just filtering out an unwanted protein. What's more most these "utility" dogs have since been bred specifically for given "looks"... look at all the pure breeds and you'll notice that most of them are neither smart, nor even that great at hunting any more. Most of them have been subjected to at least a couple hundred years of "oohhh that one's more pretty then that one"... and "that one's coat is more glossy"... Last I remember a dog's ability to smell hasn't won it any prizes at dog shows or increased their value at breeders. Oh I'm sure a given breed is given some credit for that ability, but my point is that they're no longer actively bred for that purpose... and so nearly every breed is bred for look.

The fox, wolf, wild dogs, domesticated dogs, and others are all part of the Canid family, they share a lot. Pugs and Wolves don't share much of what is in that pool, though.
So you're saying that we turned this:
http://www.canids.org/SPPACCTS/IMAGES/rfoxrabt.jpg
into this:
http://www.stacyinthecity.com/pug/pug.jpg

Look... ANY breed that was turned into anything not like it in nature is going to prove my point. Be it a retreaver, a colly, any kind of show dog... really the only dogs that would be considered not that messed with would be the sled dogs the eskimos use... being little more then domesticated wolves that would seem to be able to go back to nature rather easily.


This is why typically PETA kills any pets it recieves as tehy cannot be returned to the wild and its' against domestication of animals in any way... I DO NOT SUPPORT PETA!!! THEY"RE COMPLETELY CRAZY!!! But my point is that their crazyness largly begins and ends with them thinking domestication is evil. That part of their insanity done with they're fairly logical in concluding what can and cannot be a part of nature on it's own (All the main PETA centers have huge freezers for storing killed animal bodies.).

[Apocalypse]

I do not agree with digs being put down simply because there is no space for them. That's murder in my book.

Dog's being put down because they have killed or mauled is a tough one and I'm still two minds about it.

Oh and I would pay good money to see that Dane pummel that poodle, that would be so awesome.

[Karmashock]

I do not agree with digs being put down simply because there is no space for them. That's murder in my book.
That's not why they put them down though.

Peta puts down ANY animal that can't be released into the wild. That means that if you give them a prize show dog worth tens of thousands of dollars they'll kill it. Could they find a home for that thing? YES! But their policy is that domestication in any form is wrong. Ergo all animals that cannot exist in the wild are best killed. They do it to cattle, sheep, chickens, dolphins (captive), killer whales (captive), dogs, cats, and all sorts of other animals that have adapted to a domesticated life style.


Oh and I would pay good money to see that Dane pummel that poodle, that would be so awesome.
By "pummel" do you mean Doggy style "pummel"?

[Apocalypse]

That's not why they put them down though.

Peta puts down ANY animal that can't be released into the wild. That means that if you give them a prize show dog worth tens of thousands of dollars they'll kill it. Could they find a home for that thing? YES! But their policy is that domestication in any form is wrong. Ergo all animals that cannot exist in the wild are best killed. They do it to cattle, sheep, chickens, dolphins (captive), killer whales (captive), dogs, cats, and all sorts of other animals that have adapted to a domesticated life style.

Well my opinion still stands and takes the above into agreement too, it's just wrong.



By "pummel" do you mean Doggy style "pummel"?

I mean just that, yes. It would be awesome to see. The Dane could just wear the Poodle as a condom and pummel another dog with it!

[Leridyn]

as a cat AND dog lover, I am of mixed emotions about this. The animal friend in me thinks it's a great thing because in spite of their apparent laziness (except at 2am when you're asleep and they feel like tromping through the house like elephants) cats are very sweet and nice to have around. Bonus is that they require very little maintenance which is good for busy people.

The paranoid conspiracy theorist in me wonders about where the genetic manipulation will end, and will it be found in humans to create the "designer babies" we've all been warned about.

Meh...if the thing purrs, curls up in your lap and loves ya, it can't be all bad.

Oh, and PETA is the strangest friggin' organization on the planet. I mean, you can be supportive of animals without going apeshiat.

[Karmashock]

I love cats too... I have one... he's really old now... he spends perhaps 90 percent of each day or more sleeping... has a hard time jumping over 4 feet... and has started grooming himself very strangely (he's licked off most of the hair on his belly... don't ask me why.)...

As to designer babies, they're awsome... I can tell you right now that if and when I think that will be of any benifit to my offspring they'll be so treated. The ethics of "what about the people that can't afford it" are in my opinion false. As to religious issues... I don't see how messing with human genetics is a violation of any religious value in any major religion... certainly offical church doctrine might disagree... but that's just what modern clerics and such say... I'd like to see where it's prohibited in the actual text.

As to PETA, there are a lot of these organisations floating around... certainly they're hte craziest of the animal people... but there are plenty of such organizations for other potientially good causes.