US hypoallergenic cats go on sale

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/5375900.stm
--
Adrian (Owned by Snoopy and Bagheera)
Cats leave pawprints on your heart.
http://community.webshots.com/user/clowderuk

Adrian A wrote:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/5375900.stm
--
Adrian (Owned by Snoopy and Bagheera)
Cats leave pawprints on your heart.
http://community.webshots.com/user/clowderuk

That just makes me sad. We don't need scientists breeding designer
cats. I don't care what the reason is. Just think about all the cats
that were deliberately bred during this process of perfecting this
allegedly hypoallergenic cat. Wonder what happened to *them*. I know
there are lots of arguments *for* this. But I still don;'t like it.

Sherry

wrote:

Adrian A wrote:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/5375900.stm

That just makes me sad. We don't need scientists breeding designer
cats. I don't care what the reason is. Just think about all the cats
that were deliberately bred during this process of perfecting this
allegedly hypoallergenic cat. Wonder what happened to *them*. I know
there are lots of arguments *for* this. But I still don;'t like it.

I feel the exact same way. I couldn't even read the article, because
I knew it would upset me. Nothing personal, Adrian, I don't mind that
you posted about it. I just didn't want to know, or see pictures of
the cats, etc.

Nature is incredibly complex. You can't just *remove* certain traits
with the idea that it won't have any repercussions. How do we know
that cats don't *need* their dander for some reason? Or that they
don't need whatever mechanism it is that produces the allergenic
proteins? Perhaps they need those proteins - what a concept!

When you start tampering with biological processes, thinking that
you've isolated a particular system, you can be absolutely sure that
you have missed connections to other systems in that same organism,
which will be affected by the change, even if you can't see it.
("You" being scientists, that is.)

When wild animals are deliberately bred for specific personality
traits such as docility or tameness, even using more traditional
breeding methods, all sorts of other traits come along for the ride.
Foxes bred for tameness turn from brown to white. In fact, all
animals bred for tameness almost always change color in successive
generations, and nobody knows why. And that's just the change we can
see! How do we know what we're doing to them on the inside?

And that's not even bringing genetic engineering into the picture,
which can do in a single generation what traditional breeding needs
many generations to accomplish. Imagine the consequences in those
cases. Actually, I can't. We have no idea.

It's one thing to create hypoallergenic makeup or pillows, but a
living, sentient being? What's next, hypoallergenic children? Why
don't they put that money and energy into developing better cloths
to wipe down cats, in order to keep the dander from building up, or
better hepa filters and vacuum cleaners, etc. Oh, forgot, people
don't want to have to do all that *work*. They'd rather buy a
designer kitty.

OK, off my rant now. This just makes me really sad.

Joyce

On 2006-09-24 16:00:06 -0500, said:


Adrian A wrote:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/5375900.stm
--
Adrian (Owned by Snoopy and Bagheera)
Cats leave pawprints on your heart.
http://community.webshots.com/user/clowderuk

That just makes me sad. We don't need scientists breeding designer
cats. I don't care what the reason is. Just think about all the cats
that were deliberately bred during this process of perfecting this
allegedly hypoallergenic cat. Wonder what happened to *them*. I know
there are lots of arguments *for* this. But I still don;'t like it.

Sherry

I have to say, I kind of felt this way, but I did see a piece the other
day on a the CBS morning show and it was pretty impressive. There is a
gal who works there who cannot even date a person who owns a cat
because she is so sensative (and I once knew someone this touchy. She
just came on our porch and her eyes puffed up and she became completely
stuffed up and heavy breathing. i think she might have had a fit if she
touched a cat). She sat with this cat for 45 minutes, sitting on her
lap, petting it, and well, her expression was really something. the
other thing is that it's not like just anyone can buy them. You have
to be tested to make sure your allergies are the ones that are set off
by this particular protein. I was always under the impression the cats
were genetically engineered, but rather they found existing cats to
breed (which explains why some cats make my skin itch and some do not.
I didn't realize it's probably that some are just missing this
protein). So it has its pros and cons. They are so expensive that I
don't think they will in any manner be "throw away" cats and it should
completely dispell "lookie louves" from just getting one. I'm really
undecided about this. In this case, it isn't as though the people
getting these cats would really be able to go to a shelter to pick one
out. They just wouldn't have any cat.

Adrian A wrote:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/5375900.stm

Gee, and I thought Sphinx cats were expensive! I guess if
one loves cats enough, and is really THAT allergic, it might
be worth it, but I think I'd settle for a Rex or a Sphinx.
(They apparently solve the allergy problem for a lot of people.)

Karen wrote:
On 2006-09-24 16:00:06 -0500, said:


Adrian A wrote:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/5375900.stm
--
Adrian (Owned by Snoopy and Bagheera)
Cats leave pawprints on your heart.
http://community.webshots.com/user/clowderuk

That just makes me sad. We don't need scientists breeding designer
cats. I don't care what the reason is. Just think about all the cats
that were deliberately bred during this process of perfecting this
allegedly hypoallergenic cat. Wonder what happened to *them*. I know
there are lots of arguments *for* this. But I still don;'t like it.

Sherry

I have to say, I kind of felt this way, but I did see a piece the other
day on a the CBS morning show and it was pretty impressive. There is a
gal who works there who cannot even date a person who owns a cat
because she is so sensative (and I once knew someone this touchy. She
just came on our porch and her eyes puffed up and she became completely
stuffed up and heavy breathing. i think she might have had a fit if she
touched a cat). She sat with this cat for 45 minutes, sitting on her
lap, petting it, and well, her expression was really something. the
other thing is that it's not like just anyone can buy them. You have
to be tested to make sure your allergies are the ones that are set off
by this particular protein. I was always under the impression the cats
were genetically engineered, but rather they found existing cats to
breed (which explains why some cats make my skin itch and some do not.
I didn't realize it's probably that some are just missing this
protein). So it has its pros and cons. They are so expensive that I
don't think they will in any manner be "throw away" cats and it should
completely dispell "lookie louves" from just getting one. I'm really
undecided about this. In this case, it isn't as though the people
getting these cats would really be able to go to a shelter to pick one
out. They just wouldn't have any cat.

Well, if they're really not genetically engineered I suppose that makes
it a little better. But I don't think expense is always a factor in
whether or not a cat ends up to be a throw-away cat. I've just seen too
many stupid people who pay as much as $500 for a purebred, and then
find out that even a purebred cat poops and sheds and they're getting
rid of it. /Same with servals. Even status symbols crap on the sofa or
shred the curtains and they don't want any part of it. Some people have
money to throw away, and $3500 isn't the same to them as it is to us.
And that's true of people who spend $70 to adopt a shelter cat too. No
matter how closely you try to examine someone's motive for adopting a
cat some people just turn out to be sucky.

It's the deliberate breeding part that gets me. You know there have
been attempts to come up with this hypoallergenic cat for years. A lot
of regular, mixed-breed cats were brought into the world in the
process.

Maybe I"m just getting more jaded. I'm not criticizing your thoughts,
Karen, I wish I'd seen the program also. Maybe if I had I wouldn't be
so worked up about it.

Sherry
Sherry

wrote:
Karen wrote:
On 2006-09-24 16:00:06 -0500, said:


Adrian A wrote:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/5375900.stm
--
Adrian (Owned by Snoopy and Bagheera)
Cats leave pawprints on your heart.
http://community.webshots.com/user/clowderuk

That just makes me sad. We don't need scientists breeding designer
cats. I don't care what the reason is. Just think about all the cats
that were deliberately bred during this process of perfecting this
allegedly hypoallergenic cat. Wonder what happened to *them*. I know
there are lots of arguments *for* this. But I still don;'t like it.

Sherry

I have to say, I kind of felt this way, but I did see a piece the
other day on a the CBS morning show and it was pretty impressive.
There is a gal who works there who cannot even date a person who
owns a cat because she is so sensative (and I once knew someone this
touchy. She just came on our porch and her eyes puffed up and she
became completely stuffed up and heavy breathing. i think she might
have had a fit if she touched a cat). She sat with this cat for 45
minutes, sitting on her lap, petting it, and well, her expression
was really something. the other thing is that it's not like just
anyone can buy them. You have to be tested to make sure your
allergies are the ones that are set off by this particular protein.
I was always under the impression the cats were genetically
engineered, but rather they found existing cats to breed (which
explains why some cats make my skin itch and some do not. I didn't
realize it's probably that some are just missing this protein). So
it has its pros and cons. They are so expensive that I don't think
they will in any manner be "throw away" cats and it should
completely dispell "lookie louves" from just getting one. I'm really
undecided about this. In this case, it isn't as though the people
getting these cats would really be able to go to a shelter to pick
one out. They just wouldn't have any cat.

Well, if they're really not genetically engineered I suppose that
makes it a little better. But I don't think expense is always a
factor in whether or not a cat ends up to be a throw-away cat. I've
just seen too many stupid people who pay as much as $500 for a
purebred, and then
find out that even a purebred cat poops and sheds and they're getting
rid of it. /Same with servals. Even status symbols crap on the sofa or
shred the curtains and they don't want any part of it. Some people
have money to throw away, and $3500 isn't the same to them as it is
to us. And that's true of people who spend $70 to adopt a shelter cat
too. No matter how closely you try to examine someone's motive for
adopting a cat some people just turn out to be sucky.

It's the deliberate breeding part that gets me. You know there have
been attempts to come up with this hypoallergenic cat for years. A lot
of regular, mixed-breed cats were brought into the world in the
process.

Maybe I"m just getting more jaded. I'm not criticizing your thoughts,
Karen, I wish I'd seen the program also. Maybe if I had I wouldn't be
so worked up about it.

Sherry
Sherry

I didn't comment on the article when I first posted because I really wasn't
sure what to think. After sleeping on it, I think it would be a good thing
if a simple test could be devised to se if a cat carried the protien for
allergys, then people could adopt cats from a shelter with more confidence.
--
Adrian (Owned by Snoopy and Bagheera)
Cats leave pawprints on your heart.
http://community.webshots.com/user/clowderuk

Well, if they're really not genetically engineered I suppose that makes
it a little better. But I don't think expense is always a factor in
whether or not a cat ends up to be a throw-away cat. I've just seen too
many stupid people who pay as much as $500 for a purebred, and then
find out that even a purebred cat poops and sheds and they're getting
rid of it. /Same with servals. Even status symbols crap on the sofa or
shred the curtains and they don't want any part of it. Some people have
money to throw away, and $3500 isn't the same to them as it is to us.
And that's true of people who spend $70 to adopt a shelter cat too. No
matter how closely you try to examine someone's motive for adopting a
cat some people just turn out to be sucky.

It's the deliberate breeding part that gets me. You know there have
been attempts to come up with this hypoallergenic cat for years. A lot
of regular, mixed-breed cats were brought into the world in the
process.

Maybe I"m just getting more jaded. I'm not criticizing your thoughts,
Karen, I wish I'd seen the program also. Maybe if I had I wouldn't be
so worked up about it.


It just seems quite different to me then "buying a pretty cat" as someone
who goes after a persian or siamese etc. would do. First off, you'd have to
be awfully serious to haul out $3500 to buy a pet unless you are unusually
wealthy and even then, unless you were seriously intent on the allergy
issue, wouldn't you go for a purebred? This is such a specific reason too.
The whole motivation seems different to me then rich folk (or whatever)
buying a purebred to match their furniture. Isn't there a difference for
someone who always wanted to have a cat but blow up the minute they are
close to one as to one who wants a prestige cat? I mean, in the one case,
you could say "you could get a shelter cat" in the other case, the people
would just have no cat at all. I just can't see hundreds of orders for
these cats actually either.

Karen wrote:
Well, if they're really not genetically engineered I suppose that makes
it a little better. But I don't think expense is always a factor in
whether or not a cat ends up to be a throw-away cat. I've just seen too
many stupid people who pay as much as $500 for a purebred, and then
find out that even a purebred cat poops and sheds and they're getting
rid of it. /Same with servals. Even status symbols crap on the sofa or
shred the curtains and they don't want any part of it. Some people have
money to throw away, and $3500 isn't the same to them as it is to us.
And that's true of people who spend $70 to adopt a shelter cat too. No
matter how closely you try to examine someone's motive for adopting a
cat some people just turn out to be sucky.

It's the deliberate breeding part that gets me. You know there have
been attempts to come up with this hypoallergenic cat for years. A lot
of regular, mixed-breed cats were brought into the world in the
process.

Maybe I"m just getting more jaded. I'm not criticizing your thoughts,
Karen, I wish I'd seen the program also. Maybe if I had I wouldn't be
so worked up about it.


It just seems quite different to me then "buying a pretty cat" as someone
who goes after a persian or siamese etc. would do. First off, you'd have to
be awfully serious to haul out $3500 to buy a pet unless you are unusually
wealthy and even then, unless you were seriously intent on the allergy
issue, wouldn't you go for a purebred? This is such a specific reason too.
The whole motivation seems different to me then rich folk (or whatever)
buying a purebred to match their furniture. Isn't there a difference for
someone who always wanted to have a cat but blow up the minute they are
close to one as to one who wants a prestige cat? I mean, in the one case,
you could say "you could get a shelter cat" in the other case, the people
would just have no cat at all. I just can't see hundreds of orders for
these cats actually either.

All good points. Kind of ontopic, too; I had allergies as a kid but
outgrew them. But I am allergic to FRANK. Just Frank. If I don't wash
my hands after messing with him a lot my eyes swell up, itch, water. So
I *firmly* believe the part about some cats having that protein and
some don't.

Sherry

Adrian A wrote:

I didn't comment on the article when I first posted because I really wasn't
sure what to think. After sleeping on it, I think it would be a good thing
if a simple test could be devised to se if a cat carried the protien for
allergys, then people could adopt cats from a shelter with more confidence.

That's so simple it's brilliant!

Joyce