block

[boaterr]

Originally Posted by Conners

Hi Torlax,
You make your view clear here, but I'd like to ask, can you offer evidence to support this viewpoint? After all saying that albinos "almost always" end up with problems is a big claim. You go on to talk about issues with organs and other unobservable problems that show up eventually. What are these problems? The thing is, I'm not aware of any evidence to back up your argument here.
It's quite possible that alleles for amelanism will go hand in hand with other mutations, but in that case, what are these other mutations and what characteristic do they code for? I don't think we can be against the idea of breeding for albinism just because it feels wrong or because humans with albinism are popularly believed to be less healthy. I'm not saying that this is what your argument boils down to, but it's the kind of thing I sometimes hear other people say.
There's also the question of whether the kind of problems you speculate about could be the result of line breeding for too many generations rather than directly a result of being Tyronsinase negative.
The argument about the vulnerability of albino animals in the wild isn't really relevant, because no one should be releasing captive bred snakes of any type into the wild unless as part of a programme approved by the relevant government. It would be almost as irresponsible to release a normal-looking snake into the wild, particularly if you didn't know exactly where its ancestors were collected from.
A breeder has a lot of responsibilities, but selective breeding a trait that occurs at a consistent rate among wild animals is not frankenstein science, and I have never seen any convincing arguments against breeding snakes that display color and pattern mutations.

So do you have any evidence that albinos are not often plagued with problems?