Cloned Cat

Amara

New Member
#1
Cloned Cat Sale Generates Ethics Debate

SAN FRANCISCO Dec 23, 2004 — The first cloned-to-order pet sold in the United States is named Little Nicky, a 9-week-old kitten delivered to a Texas woman saddened by the loss of a cat she had owned for 17 years.

The kitten cost its owner $50,000 and was created from DNA from her beloved cat, named Nicky, who died last year.

"He is identical. His personality is the same," the owner, Julie, told The Associated Press in a telephone interview. Although she agreed to be photographed with her cat, she asked that her last name and hometown not be disclosed because she said she fears being targeted by groups opposed to cloning.

Yet while Little Nicky, who was delivered two weeks ago, frolics in his new home, the kitten's creation and sale has reignited fierce ethical and scientific debate over cloning technology, which is rapidly advancing.

......

Commercial interests already are cloning prized cattle for about $20,000 each, and scientists have cloned mice, rabbits, goats, pigs, horses and even the endangered banteng, a wild bull that is found mostly in Indonesia.

Several research teams around the world, meanwhile, are racing to create the first cloned monkey.

Aside from human cloning, which has been achieved only at the microscopic embryo stage, no cloning project has fueled more debate than the marketing plans of Genetic Savings and Clone.

"It's morally problematic and a little reprehensible," said David Magnus, co-director of the Center for Biomedical Ethics at Stanford University. "For $50,000, she could have provided homes for a lot of strays."

Animals rights activists complain that new feline production systems aren't needed because thousands of stray cats are euthanized each year for want of homes.

Lou Hawthorne, Genetic Savings and Clone's chief executive, said his company purchases thousands of ovaries from spay clinics across the country. It extracts the eggs, which are combined with the genetic material from the animals to be cloned.

Critics also complain that the technology is available only to the wealthy, that using it to create house pets is frivolous and that customers grieving over lost pets have unrealistic expectations of what they're buying.

In fact, the first cat cloned in 2001 had a different coat from its genetic donor, underscoring that environment and other biological variables make it impossible to exactly duplicate animals.

"The thing that many people do not realize is that the cloned cat is not the same as the original," said Bonnie Beaver, a Texas A&M animal behaviorist who heads the American Veterinary Medical Association, which has no position on the issue. "It has a different personality. It has different life experiences. They want Fluffy, but it's not Fluffy."

Scientists also warn that cloned animals suffer from more health problems than their traditionally bred peers and that cloning is still a very inexact science. It takes many gruesome failures to produce just a single clone.

Genetic Savings and Clone said its new cloning technique, developed by animal cloning pioneer James Robl has improved survival rates, health and appearance. The new technique seeks to condense and transfer only the donor's genetic material to a surrogate's egg instead of an entire cell nucleus.

Between 15 percent and 45 percent of cloned cats born alive die within the first 30 days, Hawthorne said. But he said that range is consistent with natural births, depending on the breed of cat.

Austin, Texas-based ViaGen Inc., which has cloned hundreds of cows, pigs and goats, also is experimenting with the new cloning technique.

"The jury is still out, but the research shows it to be promising," company president Sara Davis said. "The technology is improving all the time."

Genetic Savings and Clone has been behind the creation of at least five cats since 2001, including the first one created.

It hopes to deliver as many as five more clones to customers who have paid the company's $50,000 fee. By the end of next year, it hopes to have cloned as many as 50 cats.

The company has yet to turn a profit.



Copyright 2005 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.

http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/wireStory?id=355109


-------------

It's a fairly one sided article, but I guess all the news reports have tended to focus only on the miracle of the cloned cat while leaving out the less favourable points meantioned by the writer.

I wonder though if they used the technology to clone extinct animals (if that is even possible), whether it would generate different responses??
 

Jokerman

Well-Known Member
#2
Extinct animals, like dinosaurs. And open a theme park with raptors.

But they can only clone an extinct animal if the DNA being used is viable. They've tried unsuccessfully to extract viable DNA from a frozen mammoth. However, Australia is making progress in their efforts to clone a Tasmanian tiger, which went extinct 70 years ago.

http://www.austmus.gov.au/archive.cfm?id=788
 

Hurts

New Member
#4
man im sick of these 12 yr old cats shady clothes wearing cats thug cats...and now im starting to hate cloned cats...ow and fuck catwoman too!
 

Amara

New Member
#5
Jokerman said:
Extinct animals, like dinosaurs. And open a theme park with raptors.

But they can only clone an extinct animal if the DNA being used is viable. They've tried unsuccessfully to extract viable DNA from a frozen mammoth. However, Australia is making progress in their efforts to clone a Tasmanian tiger, which went extinct 70 years ago.

http://www.austmus.gov.au/archive.cfm?id=788
lol. Those sneaky raptors.... at least we would know to turn off our flashlights near the T-Rex though.... :( Just out of interest Jokerman, is that a possibility....what does it take to extract viable DNA....obviously they would not mine for amber containing a mosquito with dino DNA....

The idea of cloning extinct animals, such as the Tasmanian Tiger, would be a far more productive and in some ways, satisfying challenge for scientists, I believe. I dare say, no-one would be questioning the ethical issues in that scenario, especially considering that for the most part it is our own doing that these animals are extinct.

I think this whole cat thing is a waste of time, like the article said, thousands of kittens are put down because they are dumped and unable to be placed in homes, meanwhile this silly woman paid $50,000 for a cat that merely looks the same but will have a totally different personality to her old cat! And by the looks of things, it was just a normal tabby cat, which all look the same anyway!!
 

chaos

New Member
#7
Shoulda given me the 50K, Ill make the cat look the exact same:)

As for cloning extinct species, ever wonder why they went extinct in the first place, and if scientists do manage to achieve this, what are they supposed to do with them? Re-introduce them to the wild? If they did this, what would be the effect this speicies has on the ecology that its re-introduced to?

They may be good intentioned, but I just hope they've thought it through properly

P.S. On a side note, what would happen if scientists were to try to clone early species of man? On one hand you could have a ready resource for badly needed human organs, which does away with the problems of rejection and incompatibilty faced when transplanting animal organs, on the other the moral dilemma as to whether these are animals or humans.
 

Glockmatic

Well-Known Member
#8
As for cloning extinct species, ever wonder why they went extinct in the first place, and if scientists do manage to achieve this, what are they supposed to do with them? Re-introduce them to the wild? If they did this, what would be the effect this speicies has on the ecology that its re-introduced to?
Most extinct animals in the past 200 years were from human intervention. Reintroducing animals like the Tazmanian Tiger in tazmania would probably equalize the ecosystem (since they imported some sort of deer there).
 

Glockmatic

Well-Known Member
#9
P.S. On a side note, what would happen if scientists were to try to clone early species of man? On one hand you could have a ready resource for badly needed human organs, which does away with the problems of rejection and incompatibilty faced when transplanting animal organs, on the other the moral dilemma as to whether these are animals or humans.
If they allow that why not allow cloning of modern day humans? There would be a higher chance of success
 
#10
chaos said:
As for cloning extinct species, ever wonder why they went extinct in the first place, and if scientists do manage to achieve this, what are they supposed to do with them? Re-introduce them to the wild? If they did this, what would be the effect this speicies has on the ecology that its re-introduced to?
I made a point earlier, a lot of extinct animals, such as the Tasmanian Tiger as well as the majority of endangered species have been reduced to that status as a result of human intervention, most predominantly in regards to the destruction of habitational areas for expanding urbanisation (such as Giant Pandas, or Guerillas). So your point, that what are they going to do with raises a valid question, which I believe wasn't exactly what you meant, but for most of these animals, their natural habitat no longer exists or if it does, has greatly been reduced so as not be capable of housing a re-flourishing of a species.


P.S. On a side note, what would happen if scientists were to try to clone early species of man? On one hand you could have a ready resource for badly needed human organs, which does away with the problems of rejection and incompatibilty faced when transplanting animal organs, on the other the moral dilemma as to whether these are animals or humans.
If they are cloning in order to obtain human organs, then they wouldn't need to re-create a complete human body, they could simply clone the single organ, that way there is no concern over rejection because it is a copy of the individuals own. This would also eliminate the moral dilemma. You have to wonder though considering the high rate of failure and latter complications of cloned "animals" or whatever you chose to call them, whether it is worth subjecting a human to... I mean, at the moment it's all still at the experimental stage... you just cannot predict the physical and mental complications a human clone may experience.
 

Jokerman

Well-Known Member
#11
Amara said:
this silly woman paid $50,000 for a cat that merely looks the same but will have a totally different personality to her old cat!
Yeah, her original cat may have had the kind of personality that processed unconscious conflicts between pleasure seeking impulses and social restraints, whereas the cloned cat may focus more on self-actualizing needs that emphasize Western values of individuality and autonomy.
 
#12
LMAO at Jokerman! :)

So I die, can they "wake" me up 60 years later? That'd be cool, unless the world is suffering from a 3d world war.
 
#13
stop the evil cloning process
who do they think they are ? god?

and about that freezing in... u ppl watch too much Discovery Channel....
 

Latest posts

Donate

Any donations will be used to help pay for the site costs, and anything donated above will be donated to C-Dub's son on behalf of this community.

Members online

No members online now.
Top