Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

South Korean Scientists Create Glowing Dog

samzenpus posted more than 3 years ago | from the how-much-is-that-glowing-dog-in-the-window dept.

Biotech 139

cultiv8 writes "A research team from Seoul National University (SNU) said the genetically modified female beagle has been found to glow fluorescent green under ultraviolet light if given a doxycycline antibiotic. The researchers, who completed a two-year test, said the ability to glow can be turned on or off by adding a drug to the dog's food. 'The creation of Tegon opens new horizons since the gene injected to make the dog glow can be substituted with genes that trigger fatal human diseases,' the news agency quoted lead researcher Lee Byeong-chun as saying. He said the dog was created using the somatic cell nuclear transfer technology that the university team used to make the world's first cloned dog, Snuppy, in 2005."

cancel ×

139 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

All I can think of is the joke... (1)

mike.rimov (1148959) | more than 3 years ago | (#36905638)

Who's (modified for the article) punchline is.

"Hey, I'm a programmer, I don't have time for a princess, but hey, a glowing dog, now that's cool"

Re:All I can think of is the joke... (2)

derGoldstein (1494129) | more than 3 years ago | (#36905704)

[dog barks]
damn dogs never let me sleep at night (closes window)
[dog glows]
damn dogs never let me sleep at night (closes curtains)

Re:All I can think of is the joke... (1)

rainmouse (1784278) | more than 3 years ago | (#36905722)

"Hey, I'm a programmer, I don't have time for a princess, but hey, a glowing dog, now that's cool"

Glowing dog? Pics or it didn't happen.

Re:All I can think of is the joke... (0)

derGoldstein (1494129) | more than 3 years ago | (#36905846)

I thought that at first, but then realized that you're not going to see some glowing poodle wagging its tail -- you're going to see some poor, sick, probably unconscious little creature that's barely alive.
(I'm not dissing research on animals as a whole, just pointing out that you probably don't want to see a picture of the results)

Re:All I can think of is the joke... (1)

derGoldstein (1494129) | more than 3 years ago | (#36905852)

Erm... forget I said that. Go here [stuff.co.nz] . I'm really glad I was wrong.

Re:All I can think of is the joke... (1)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | more than 3 years ago | (#36905946)

When you are a $3.5 million proof-of-concept, and also an adorable microbeagle, you are probably OK.

The concept-proven successors working on the "because there are 268 illnesses that humans and dogs have in common, creating dogs that artificially show such symptoms could aid treatment methods for diseases that afflict humans" part of the project are likely to be a bit more pitiable.

Re:All I can think of is the joke... (1)

Hal_Porter (817932) | more than 3 years ago | (#36906606)

an tasty microbeagle

FTFY given it's Korea.

Re:All I can think of is the joke... (1, Interesting)

beadfulthings (975812) | more than 3 years ago | (#36906716)

I happen to have a journalist acquaintance who wrote a pretty good book [amazon.com] about dog cloning in Korea. I can tell you you're both right and wrong. You will see the adorable beagle mentioned in the post just below. What you won't see, and (just as you say) won't want to see are the many dogs sacrificed for the project. Although Seoul and other cities are home to pampered pets, dogs are also a livestock commodity in Korea, and if you want to do a bit of research, you won't have any trouble getting all the dogs you want, and nobody will particularly care where they go.

We could've easily produced the first cloned dog right here in the United States, and researchers in Texas knew that. They also knew, full well, that Americans wouldn't stand for what had to be done in order to accomplish the feat.

In any event, if you like dogs, "Dog, Inc." is a pretty good read.

Re:All I can think of is the joke... (1)

jamiesan (715069) | more than 3 years ago | (#36907092)

It's a dog's light in this man's modern research lab.

Re:All I can think of is the joke... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36907198)

North Korean Scientists invent Glowing South Koreans,
Method?
  Atomic Weapons, works on Dogs too

Great useful feature! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36905642)

If you lose the dog in the dark, you can quickly find it with your portable ultraviolet torch. Err.. maybe not that useful I guess.

Perfect theme song (1)

devleopard (317515) | more than 3 years ago | (#36905668)

George Clinton's Atomic Dog

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LuyS9M8T03A [youtube.com]

link to the picture (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36905688)

http://www.stuff.co.nz/technology/5354635/Scientists-create-glowing-dog

Re:link to the picture (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36905796)

Interesting, but there's something a tad odd about that article:

Tegon...has been found to glow fluorescent green under ultraviolet

The pictures have her glowing orangey-red. What gives?

MAKES IT EASIER TO FIND DINNER !! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36905696)

Koreans eat their dogs, you see !! It's true !!

Re:MAKES IT EASIER TO FIND DINNER !! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36905714)

1. Make Dogs Glow
2. Bestiality Pr0n
3. Profit!!!11!!

What fun! (1)

Cornwallis (1188489) | more than 3 years ago | (#36905706)

'The creation of Tegon opens new horizons since the gene injected to make the dog glow can be substituted with genes that trigger fatal human diseases,'

Now, just substitute "can be" with "will be"...

Re:What fun! (1)

underqualified (1318035) | more than 3 years ago | (#36905754)

What a waste of science.

Re:What fun! (1)

sakdoctor (1087155) | more than 3 years ago | (#36905768)

What is the fascination with making animals glow?

Make lawn grass that produces THC, or better yet LSD already.

Re:What fun! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36905838)

Grass already contains DMT, isn't that good enough?

Re:What fun! (1)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | more than 3 years ago | (#36905968)

Why grass? Wouldn't DEA agents who involuntarily produce illicit compounds metabolically be much more amusing?

Re:What fun! (5, Informative)

FatLittleMonkey (1341387) | more than 3 years ago | (#36906122)

What is the fascination with making animals glow?

It's a quick and dirty way to test whether the inserted gene is being expressed in all tissues.

Step two is to attach your desired test gene to the bioluminescent gene. Now you can see where the test gene is being expressed. That removes the doubt from a failure to get the expected result; is it because the experimental treatment doesn't work properly, or because the gene isn't active in the desired tissue? Failure+glow means the treatment failed. Failure+no-glow means a problem with the insertion.

(IANAB, IANYB.)

Re:What fun! (1)

Kamiza Ikioi (893310) | more than 3 years ago | (#36907328)

+5 Insightful

Re:What fun! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36907596)

So it's like a debug statement then?

That actually makes a lot of sense.

Re:What fun! (3, Informative)

Samantha Wright (1324923) | more than 3 years ago | (#36907630)

IAAB. It's equivalent to using a print statement as a report mechanism during debugging. In fact, this use of GFP is even called a "reporter" gene. There are other reporters commonly used; prior to the discovery of fluorescent proteins, the most popular bacterial reporter was a step in the lactose metabolism pathway that caused the colony to turn blue when it was interrupted by another gene (thus demonstrating not functionality, but that the gene had been inserted correctly into the carrier molecule.)

Another control mechanism that's often used is antibiotic resistance: if it doesn't die, then the resistance gene is where it should be. This has the added benefit of getting rid of the samples you don't want at the same time. Of course, neither of these are very useful for seeing tissue-specific expression, which is why fluorescent proteins revolutionized molecular biology when they were discovered.

Re:What fun! (1)

ginbot462 (626023) | more than 3 years ago | (#36908022)

>> It's equivalent to using a print statement

Imagine what will happen when we have a remote kernel debugger?

Re:What fun! (2)

Samantha Wright (1324923) | more than 3 years ago | (#36908240)

Well, right now we have the ability to take memory dumps and compare them, creating a kind of rudimentary trace log. This shoddy JPEG of a microarray [bu.edu] displays one column per gene of interest. Brightness reflects gene expression level (red is low, green is high, grey is in between.) Each row is a separate set of conditions, such as progress through a stress response.

In plant biology, time of day has been used as the y-axis, by taking many different samples at different times. This was done in order to find the genes responsible for changing between photosynthesis and respiration, and created a very cool and nifty image (in one of my textbooks that I don't have readily available) of all sorts of repeated and dynamic patterns, only a tiny fraction of which we understand—but at least we can see them!

Getting a kernel debugger, though, would require the ability to stop time instantly in order to equivalate interrupts and traps. I don't think that's going to happen any time soon. :)

Re:What fun! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36906384)

This is like having an LED for debugging genetic code in a system where you have no other ways before.

INB4 spoiled kids asking for source code debugger.

Re:What fun! (1)

hesiod (111176) | more than 3 years ago | (#36907354)

That quote seemed suspicious to me. So if they can add something to food to trigger the "glow" gene, that quote means they can also add something to food to trigger the "fatal disease" gene... That's a TERRIBLE idea!!! (Yes, I know the individual would need to have the gene encoded before birth, and it's not just the food additive...)

Re:What fun! (1)

kiatoa (66945) | more than 3 years ago | (#36908010)

Seems like a great solution for feral dogs and helping breeders get rich. To all your pure-bred (assuming genetically modified is still "pure-bred") dogs, cats whatever add a gene that causes them to die if not fed a special additive to their food.

No more strays ...

I'm just kidding of course but whats the bet that the Monsanto equivalent in the pet world does just exactly this?

Re:What fun! (1)

LWATCDR (28044) | more than 3 years ago | (#36907816)

Well yes. If you can create lab animals with the same fatal condition you can then test treatments for the condition on them. You then get into that whole animal testing issue. It is one of those areas where people will have different opinions for sure.
I am in the cost vs benefit camp.
Animal testing for cosmetics == bad.
Animal testing to save lives == acceptable.
Others have different opinions on that.

Perfect plan (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36905744)

1 - create glowing dog
2- ???
3- Profit !

Flu Shot anyone ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36905758)

let the paranoia begin.
Gives the term "crowd controll" a whole new meaning ...

meh... GFP (2)

staalmannen (1705340) | more than 3 years ago | (#36905774)

Ok this was a proof-of-concept experiment to make a transgenic dog using Dox-inducible expression. It might be useful for some stuff since dogs are a genetic model for some human diseases but still not THAT cool... What I am REALLY looking forward to is someone doing a homologous replacement of Tbx5 with Tbx4 in chickens (pehaps by using zinc finger nucleases). This would most likely change the development of the wings to front-legs. A four-legged chichken - THAT would be cool. When that proof-of concept experiment would be done we could do the same for a number of other birds - ostriches for example (would be neat riding beasts)... and with some proper breeding we might even be able to generate something similar to dinosaurs :P

Fluorescent green dogburgers! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36905782)

Yum yum!

Insanity (-1, Troll)

GeoffreyBernardo (1991048) | more than 3 years ago | (#36905786)

The headline should read: "South Korean IDIOTS create glowing dog". The are messing with nature's source code. Who knows what kinds unforeseen freaks are going to appear? The Bible says God destroys those who destroy the Earth.

Re:Insanity (0)

Darth Hamsy (1432187) | more than 3 years ago | (#36905850)

+1 Troll. Nearly had me.

Re:Insanity (1)

Enleth (947766) | more than 3 years ago | (#36905886)

According to Nietsche, God is dead since at least 1882, which means that the source code is in public domain even by the standards of Disney. Sorry, no bonus.

[Feeding a troll? Sure, the bigger a piece, the better, more chance of choking!]

Re:Insanity (1)

magusxxx (751600) | more than 3 years ago | (#36906762)

They're not destroying the Earth. They're just Genetically Engineering with Extreme Prejudice.

Not glowing (5, Informative)

Zouden (232738) | more than 3 years ago | (#36905794)

While I don't mean to belittle the work done by these scientists, I want to point out a common mistake used in science journalism - referring to GFP as "glowing". It does not glow, in any sense of the word. It fluoresces, which means you need to shine blue or UV light on it and examine it through a filter that removes the incident light, and then it will appear green. It can appear quite amazing under those conditions, but you can't take this dog out for a walk at night and see it emitting green light. You won't even see it reflecting green light, unless you take him near a UV source.

There is a biological technique that does cause things to glow [wikipedia.org] , but it's more complicated than a single protein so is not as commonly used as GFP.

Re:Not glowing (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36906016)

glow |gl| verb
give out steady light without flame:

You know, you could always carry a portable blacklight with you....

Re:Not glowing (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36906136)

better yet, you could mount them on the dog. Fast and furious style...

Re:Not glowing (1)

kieran (20691) | more than 3 years ago | (#36906116)

The restaurant will sort out the lighting and provide filtering glasses. Done!

Also: Older than shit! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36906294)

Dammit! My grandma told me that they did this in the fuckin' 60s!!

If I didn't know that Slashdot already managed to have "news" on it, that were only a few hundred years old, I'd say this is a new record!

Re:Not glowing (1)

Metabolife (961249) | more than 3 years ago | (#36907132)

This dog would be awesome at a rave!

WTF? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36905800)

"the gene injected to make the dog glow can be substituted with genes that trigger fatal human diseases"

Now why the hell would anyone want to do that?

Re:WTF? (1)

umghhh (965931) | more than 3 years ago | (#36905948)

as somebody pointed out already a dog is a nice approximation of what human body would do in case of certain diseases. Now it is all yours to determine whether this is done to make better drugs of terms of efficiency in curing stuff, making better drugs in terms of curing stuff only as good as is enough for profit or makingstuff that kills people effectively or some other purpose. I for one would tip it is either 2 or 3 but it may be that some naive scientists lied to a politician and actually did 1 - I mean it is possible even if not likely.

Re:WTF? (2)

rjzak (159949) | more than 3 years ago | (#36906318)

Curing stuff by triggering the disease? No thanks. Sounds more like genetically engineering people to have a built-in kill switch.

Re:WTF? (1)

hesiod (111176) | more than 3 years ago | (#36907416)

Thank you, I was beginning to wonder if I was the only one who read that sentence correctly, as-written.

Something for fussy eaters. (1)

zetsurin (993567) | more than 3 years ago | (#36905860)

Glowing meals? The things people do to keep their food interesting!

Korean BBQ (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36905880)

Why would Koreans want to eat glowing food?

Re:Korean BBQ (1)

DamienNightbane (768702) | more than 3 years ago | (#36906246)

So they can save electricity by taking the light bulbs out of their fridges.

unappetizing (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36905940)

Just make sure there are UV filters on the lights in the restaurant. That would really put me off my dinner. :o)

Do77 (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36905982)

The projec7 is in deliver. Some of that they c4n hold are there? Oh,

Imagine a burglar ... (1)

fuzzytv (2108482) | more than 3 years ago | (#36906034)

Imagine a burglar who comes to your house. A pitbull growling in the dark - that's already pretty scary. A glowing growling pitbull, that's super-scary.

Afterwards... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36906142)

And then ate him...

Dog Fur Dye Industry (1)

retroworks (652802) | more than 3 years ago | (#36906168)

I like how they always say "could lead to a cure for Alzheimer's" every time they use genetic engineering to do a nerdy prank. There is need or market demand for glowing dogs, no problem being solved or cost reduced. Sooner or later someone's going to let the DNA loose and nature is going to get hurt.

Re:Dog Fur Dye Industry (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36906324)

There is need or market demand for glowing dogs, no problem being solved or cost reduced.

I'm assuming you meant NO need or market demand, and I doubt that.

I'm sure quite a few people would like a glow in the dark designer dog, especially those folks who have them tiny dogs they carry around.

Sooner or later someone's going to let the DNA loose and nature is going to get hurt.

I...y'know, I wanted to go off on a vitriol filled rant about how fearmongering results in us huddling in caves sitting on our hands, but I couldn't phrase it in a way that I liked. So let me just say, I don't agree with you.

Re:Dog Fur Dye Industry (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36907624)

Stop anthropomorphicizing Nature, she hates that.

Many miss the point here (1)

Cable (99315) | more than 3 years ago | (#36906278)

The gene that causes the dog to glow under ultraviolet light when a certain food is given to it, can have the gene replaced with one dogs and humans share. This can help test gene therapy to help cure these genetic disorders.

meh. (1)

JustNiz (692889) | more than 3 years ago | (#36906280)

The mutation is just reflecting an external UV light. It would be much cooler if it could actually *generate* light. Imagine a dog that could glow like a glow worm.

Why not Pigs? (1)

fygment (444210) | more than 3 years ago | (#36906362)

Are they not closer to human physiology ... or is that just BS so nobody feels bad about the god-awful things they do to pigs in the name of science/medecine? But then Korea has a bit of a hate-on for dogs so it makes sense.

I Absolutely hate (0)

shoehornjob (1632387) | more than 3 years ago | (#36906382)

people who do research on household pets. I consider my dog to be part of my family and when I hear of asshole scientists doing research on what would otherwise be someone's pet it really pisses me off. There is no reason for that or any dog to glow or have any other "modification". This just backs up my observation that most of these people are a$$holes.

Re:I Absolutely hate (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36906514)

people who do research on household pets. I consider my dog to be part of my family and when I hear of asshole scientists doing research on what would otherwise be someone's pet it really pisses me off. There is no reason for that or any dog to glow or have any other "modification". This just backs up my observation that most of these people are a$$holes.

I understand your sentiment, but bear in mind that every society draws an arbitrary line between the animals we befriend and those we eat. You protect your dog and eat bacon. In korea some dog breeds are befriended while other breeds are food.

Re:I Absolutely hate (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36906524)

Would you like to volunteer for medical experimentation yourself instead?
Volunteers are always welcome. But we try to cut down on human experimentation, unlike Monsanto & co.

Re:I Absolutely hate (1)

SlashV (1069110) | more than 3 years ago | (#36906590)

Thanks for putting my feeling to words. However, I must admit that this feeling is somewhat hypocritical. I mean, just taking pity on an animal because you happen to like it. Pigs for example are equally smart and adorable (although less handsome) as dogs, yet we put them in small cages and butcher them by the millions. This one dog being cloned and maybe not even having a particularly bad life is bliss by comparison.

Re:I Absolutely hate (1)

shoehornjob (1632387) | more than 3 years ago | (#36907532)

Your point is valid. I just wish that research can get to a point where most of the modelling is done on super computers (cray, big blue etc. I know some of it has already being done but progress can't come too soon. On the other hand I do like the pig for dinner. At one time I considered having one of those pot bellied pigs for a family pet but my wife pretty much vetoed that before I could make a good arguement.

Re:I Absolutely hate (3, Insightful)

bareman (60518) | more than 3 years ago | (#36906604)

Meanwhile people whose child or spouse is spared from death by this same research feel quite differently about it.

Re:I Absolutely hate (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36906656)

So...are you saying you'd prefer they should stop all animal experimentation, or only those animals that are pets to someone out there? Which is quite a broad range of animals.

Or perhaps you prefer animals to be natural and not be messed about with humans? Which means that a significant number of dog breeds would be considered monstrous by you.

Or maybe you just mean genetic experiments? Or drug based? Or do you also consider experiments in changing their diet? Psychological experimentation? Environmental manipulation? Etc, etc.

They are trying to use non-human animals in place of humans since we have major gripes about human experimentation. As you consider all dogs to be at the "level" of humans, this would, of course, cause you discomfort. However, not everyone sees it like that. For some people, they seem to think that animals, dogs, cats, mice, naked mole rats, alpacas, baboons, slugs, roaches, cockatoos, parrots, etc are all more preferable to experiment on than human beings. Usually with an insane amount of oversight now (at least in the US of A), but they still trudge on to get this shit done.

Are they assholes? Who knows. If you talk to PETA, they're probably Satan himself, assfucking Hitler with Osama in the back (TOOT TOOT MAN TRAIN). If you talk to people that benefit from treatments pioneered and verified through animal testing, polio/heart surgery/leprosy/etc, would probably say they're decent people. If you talk to the people themselves, you'll probably find some of them just want to help people and damn the animals while others are bleeding hearts who'll drop out of animal experimentation after one too many puppies dying on them.

Do I think animal experimentation is good? Yes. Do I wish there were alternatives so we wouldn't have to do it? Hell yes. Would I prefer if we could use people who step forward and sell their bodies to science to get experimented on? Oh fuck yes. None of that ethical shit about "animals don't want to do it" or "it's cruel to them" if people stood up and said "YES, EXPERIMENT ON ME FOR A MILLION DOLLARS." Like that cow in Hitchhikers that wanted to be eaten.

Anyway, scientists aren't douchebags unless they're douchebags and experimenting on animals means very little as an indicator of their douchebaggery. It just means that you probably love animals a shitton more than these scientists, the people supporting these scientists, the people running oversight on these scientists, and the people raking money on the successes of these scientists.

Re:I Absolutely hate (1)

Stem_Cell_Brad (1847248) | more than 3 years ago | (#36908044)

shucks, i have no mod points left +1

Re:I Absolutely hate (1)

kiatoa (66945) | more than 3 years ago | (#36908288)

I dunno, I've eaten dog before (tends to taste a bit like what it was eating, coconut and scraps, yech). I also had a dog that got hit by a car and the neighbors got to it before we did. Apparently they ate well that night. Shit happens. Things are born, die, sometimes get eaten by other things. That said I could never eat my own dog (extreme starvation situation excepted). Your emotional attachment is just that, an emotional attachment and personally I'm fine with offending your sensibilities if it yields a cure for some nasty disease.

All that said however, I'm a firm believer that *all* animals should be treated with compassion and respect. I consider brutal treatment of cows destined for a grease burger just as despicable as torturing lab monkeys with toxic cosmetics. Why single out dogs for special treatment?

leave life alone (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36906386)

I have the impression playing with nature is stupid. Those researches should go find themselves first. The submit themselves to the cause of science. They can be the subject of their experiments.
I think we would see better progress being made.

Of course glowing! All dog glowing! (2)

erroneus (253617) | more than 3 years ago | (#36906486)

Why this news? Dog is born puppy, then you feed it and it glowing. Keep feed it and it keep glowing until all glow up.

Re:Of course glowing! All dog glowing! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36906998)

I chuckled. Good show.

Re:Of course glowing! All dog glowing! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36907008)

My kingdom for modpoints!

Re:Of course glowing! All dog glowing! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36907106)

+1 mildly racist.

Re:Of course glowing! All dog glowing! (1)

ginbot462 (626023) | more than 3 years ago | (#36908058)

You resisted the urge to make a "try the special of the day" remark. +1

Yes, It glows (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36906552)

... but will it blend?

Quote from researcher upon experimental success. (1)

hey! (33014) | more than 3 years ago | (#36906676)

It's ALIVE! [insane cackle]

While this is serious science, there's a whiff of mad science about it. If this were my project, I'd dine out at science fiction conventions for the rest of my life on this.

Fatal human diseases? (2)

darniil (793468) | more than 3 years ago | (#36906712)

Ok, I'm sure this is nothing to worry about, but the way part of the article was worded threw me off.

the gene injected to make the dog glow can be substituted with genes that trigger fatal human diseases

The way that's written, my first thought was using dogs as bioweapons. I doubt that's really the case, so what do they really mean by this?

Re:Fatal human diseases? (1)

DekkerAvesque (822275) | more than 3 years ago | (#36907914)

Right? I was thinking they were implying they could genetically alter a human so that when given this antibiotic said person would contract a fatal disease.

Re:Fatal human diseases? (1)

ginbot462 (626023) | more than 3 years ago | (#36908088)

They are trying to creates those dogs from Call of Duty's kino der toten level. Grab your shotgun.

Taking my Rottweiler to a Rave (1)

magusxxx (751600) | more than 3 years ago | (#36906776)

Great! Now I don't have to pick my dog up, break it in half, and shake.

restaurants (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36906982)

I imagine this is so all you need is a portable uv light with you to test whether or not your food is authentic dog or rip off cat meat.

My Cat Does That (1)

cheezitmike (537630) | more than 3 years ago | (#36907082)

So what? My cat can produce spots on the carpet that glow under a fluorescent UV light. I suppose if we had a dog, the cat could pee on the dog and make it glow too. But you don't see cats running of to publish stuff in journals; they have too much important napping and paw-licking to do instead.

We must not allow a glowing dog gap! (1)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 3 years ago | (#36907150)

Mr. President, we *must* develop our own glowing dog before the North Koreans develop this technology too.

Re:We must not allow a glowing dog gap! (1)

Stem_Cell_Brad (1847248) | more than 3 years ago | (#36907984)

I suppose we should develop a doomsday dog that explodes upon detecting fluorescence of a glow dog.

Carotenosis (1)

plsenjy (2104800) | more than 3 years ago | (#36907322)

I understand that if humans ingest enough carrots a similar effect can be produced.

Missing the point... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36907432)

You guys are all missing the point! This isn't about cute dogs; this technology can one day be used to help humans.

Because who doesn't want a girl that glows up green in the dark when you shine a blacklight on her.

You all ARE missing the point (1)

Provocateur (133110) | more than 3 years ago | (#36907454)

Corporate sponsorships. Yep, ads on animals, e.g. flashing on green sea turtles. And a talking chimp.

The late Michael Crichton already wrote about it in Next.

Dinner? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36907498)

Takes the fun out of hunting for your food.

bonsai! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36907604)

What's next? Kittens that grown into the shape of glass jars?

Life imitates Art (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36907658)

Wasn't there an episode of The Big Bang Theory where Sheldon creates bio-luminescent goldfish to use as living nightlights?

Damn that interpreter!!! (1)

sgt scrub (869860) | more than 3 years ago | (#36907860)

I said glow in the dark mosquitos not beagles.

As Zhasu said to Scar ... (1)

140Mandak262Jamuna (970587) | more than 3 years ago | (#36908126)

The opening dialog of Zhasu's intro in The Lion King, addressed to Scar was, "Didn't your mother teach you not to play with your food?". Looks like we could ask the Korean scientists the same thing.

Y'all are completely missing the point. (1)

dotfile (536191) | more than 3 years ago | (#36908148)

This could turn out to be an energy saving breakthrough. Just imagine the annual energy savings from being able to dramatically reduce lighting levels in restaurants.

The Urban Coyotes Thank You... (1)

littlewink (996298) | more than 3 years ago | (#36908170)

Now we can see dinner delivery coming at night.

Didn't someone do this with cats at some point? (1)

JustAnotherIdiot (1980292) | more than 3 years ago | (#36908256)

I swear this story sounds familiar...
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?