Page 131 - Cultural Studies of Science Education

108 M.P. Mueller and D.L. Zeidler

The FDA provided the following online statement on December 9, 2003:
Because tropical aquarium fish are not used for food purposes, they pose no threat to the
food supply. There is no evidence that these genetically engineered zebra danio fish pose
any more threat to the environment than their unmodified counterparts which have long
been widely sold in the United States. In the absence of a clear risk to the public health,
the FDA finds no reason to regulate these particular fish (n.p.).
The fact that GMO pets are not federally regulated nor have undergone sustained
research study for much time explains why California, Canada, and the European
Union banned sales of GloFish respectively. Despite the ban, Glofish have been
located in California and European countries as consumers purchase them elsewhere
and import pets (Bratspies 2005). What follows is the possibility of importing them
to South Asia, which may have unintended environmental consequences not yet
known. These consequences have been de-emphasized or ignored in light of refut-
ing possible environmental consequences for ecosystems where GloFish are legally
distributed (see letters of no harm from scientists at http://www.glofish.com).
Yorktown Technologies’ mantra is “Experience the Glo ” which has teachers
TM
and parents in a glaring trance, according to Georgia pet store owners (M.P.
Mueller, 2009, personal observation). As more science teachers purchase GloFish
for their classrooms there are very few conversations about the ethical, political,
and social implications for society. Pet store owners are not required to say anything
about whether the GloFish is a “natural” or genetically engineered pet. However,
some pet store employees have started to disclose information about GloFish to
customers in order to reduce the number of returned fish when customers become
upset. GloFish, having become “cool new inventions,” are now available in a
mosaic of other colors such as Electric Green® and Sunburst Orange®. What edu-
cators and their students may overlook is that genetically modified pets are more
“socioscientifically” sophisticated than what meets the eye.

GloFish in the Classroom

A science resource company, Carolina Biological Supply Company (http://www.
carolina.com/) has partnered with Yorktown to distribute interesting lesson plans
and activities for investigating Glofish behaviors. One lesson (Yorktown
Technologies 2009a) “It’s Cold Outside: Exploring the Effects of Temperature on
GloFish® Activity” provides background information for the teacher asserting that
the GloFish is a genetically modified zebrafish and so it has the same range of habitats
as the wild type. Without referencing their sources, Yorktown’s lesson concludes
for teachers and students that scientists have determined zebrafish are unable to
survive in North American waterways. This becomes the “correct answer” that
learners are supposed to derive from these lessons and associated activities. In the
Possible Answers to Discussion Questions, Yorktown indicates that the GloFish or
wild-type zebrafish would not be able to inhabit lakes and streams in North
America, suggesting, “No, lake and stream temperatures in North America would