I have seen over the past two weeks pictures of the two kittens that were cloned. They looked identical to me, and they were so cute. I also saw last year a picture of one kitten cloned that looked nothing like the other cat that it was a clone of. Then, there was Dolly that didn't live very long. I am not sure how healthy a cloned animal could be, and I believe that this cloning company is working on cloning a dog, but it seems to be a harder procedure. Anyone hear of any dogs that were cloned?
For our "smart class" in school, we re-enacted a senate hearing to see if cloning should be banned or not. There is yet for a dog to be cloned, evne though some people have claimed in doing it. ---Allie the Chihuahua http://www.dogster.com/?41063 ---Mönica the Kitty http://www.catster.com/?57596
i have not heard of any dogs being cloned. are cloned animals exactly the same as the animal they were cloned from ? besids just looks do they act the same also ? i would have loved to have had a clone of my golden mix that passed away last june. minus maybe his submissive urinating trait the first year of his life.
No, clones are not the exact copy of it's "clonee." They usually have different traits than the "original," but they are very hard to see. ---Allie the Chihuahua http://www.dogster.com/?41063 ---Mönica the Kitty http://www.catster.com/?57596
Actually Allie, clones are the exact copy genetically. They use the exact same DNA. The thing is, certain characteristics, like color in the calico cat that was cloned, are expressed differently despite the same genetic material. We don't know why. It's like certain things turn on during development, and some things dont. I'll give you an example. Think of identical twins. They came literally from the same cell that divided into identical genetic material. But yet even identical twins often look different on close examination. Heck, even cojoined twins will still look different. Genetics are weird. I haven't heard of the successful cloning of a dog yet.
I'm checking back with that company next year to see how much they are going to charge to clone a dog. They have a pet bank now where you can store your dogs DNA and depending on which option you choose, it can cost over $1,000.00.
I strongly believe that the future of cloning will be in cloning pets. Think of how many people who have mixed breed dogs (and even purebred dogs!), and want another that is just like it. Yes, it won't be the exact same dog because environment plays a huge role in dog behavior, but I doubt most people care. It would be like them having a part of their old dog that lives on. Especially for dogs that are taken in tragic ways like though injury and accidents instead of dying through the normal course of events. If geneticists can figure out what causes the organs in the current cloned animals to age prematurely and prevent that, offering a guarantee that the animal will live a normal healthy life, there'll be no stopping cloning.
Yup. I am totally against cloning, if it be stem cell research, gene therapy, or just plain duplicating. Yea, I know it may help cancer patients, but every round of stem cells they take from a fetus is one baby killed. It took over 500 sheep to clone Dolly. So that means it took the lives of 500 sheep to make one Dolly. ---Allie the Chihuahua http://www.dogster.com/?41063 ---Mönica the Kitty http://www.catster.com/?57596
I agree with you 100% Minniyar. When Butch was so sick last week, and I thought that I could lose him, the first thought that came to my mind was that I wish I could get him cloned. I know that now to clone a pet it costs thousands of dollars. But I believe that this is the way of the future for pets. And once it takes off, the cost should come down. Right now, I know you can bank your pet's DNA and pay a yearly fee. But then, there aren't too many companies out there doing it and I believe that it could be a risk for now, i.e. if the company goes bankrupt, etc. But in the future, there will probably be many that will arise.
I don't see where there is a problem with cloning ones pet. I am not a scientist, but from what I understand, the DNA taken to clone your pet would come from just your pet. Several small biopsies are taken from your pet which I understand is not painful to the pet, and would be done by a vet.
Allie, if we left it up to nature to make things, we wouldn't have cures for many of the diseases that currently exist. Or vaccines to prevent the debilitating diseases that affect animals and humans alike. Yes, the big thing about cloning is that it takes an adult cell, I think it was from the udder of the sheep for Dolly. (well this is how they cloned Dolly, there's different methods used in cloning). They emove the dna from it and puts it into an unfertilized ova of the 'surrogate' mother that has been emptied out of cellular matter. So all it is is the ova of a cell wall. Then they 'zap' the cell to jump start cellular division and the embryo is formed from that. Cloning doesn't generally refer to embryonic research, which really is far far easier, as far as genetics go.
How many times has someone said on this forum that they would like to breed their dog because their family members or friends want a dog like their's, and this whole board has lit up? I can only imagine what would be said about cloning. I am not real sure how I feel about it. Allie and Minniyar have raised some very good points, but I just am not sure.
I'm not sure how I feel about it either. I guess the scientist in me can see the benefits of it, but I can also understand the moral concerns, especially since there is so much difficulty involved in the current process and the cloned animals do have health issues. I think that if scientists work their way past these difficulties again, and have a high rate of success with low mortality.... Back in the 70s, people thought that test tube babies were evil, as were fertility clinics and such. Because fertilization clinics end up fertilizing 7 or 8 embryos, some are kept and implanted, and some aren't. Some are frozen for future use. Early attempts weren't all that successful, but as they developed the procedures and guidelines, it became more accepted and more successful. Yet through successful fertilization clinics and therapy, millions and millions of people have children where they might not have ever had any for one reason or another.
I think cloning is just asking for trouble. As far as personality, you can't pass that on. Not totally. Personality is a conditioned trait. So if you cloned Hitler, that doesn't mean the new hitler would be just as evil. How we act has the largest part to do with how we were raised and our society. If you cloned a kid, and raised one with a religious family in the US and the other with a tribe in Africa, they would be totally different kids.
i'm not sure how i feel about cloning, either. right now i'm mostly against it, but then i'm all for stem cell research. all those shelter dogs and cats are still screaming out at me. maybe not logical, but humans aren't logical.
This reminds of that movie about a fertilization clinic, and the doctor used his own sperm, without anyone knowing. Women were having his kids right and left, and all of them had the same physical defects.
My thoughts on this are one dog, one dog's DNA and one family and/or person and a legally binding agreement/contract for that one dog's DNA to be used to clone one dog for that family and no further. Personalities will differ in a cloned animal and whether it would turn out to be a good thing or a bad thing is something that I would be interested in knowing.