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!

Get the Family Dog Cloned

samzenpus posted more than 6 years ago | from the love-them-twice-today dept.

Biotech 240

Anonymous writes "Some of you may have seen 'The 6th Day,' the movie with Arnold Schwarzenegger a few years back. If you recall there was a 're-pet' cloning service to get your dog back if you ever lost them. Enter 'Best Friends Again': 'A US biotech company on Wednesday announced it will auction off the right for five dog owners to have their furry best friend cloned, with bidding starting at 100,000 dollars. "BioArts International ... will sell five dog cloning service slots to the general public via a worldwide online auction," the California-based biotech start-up said in a statement.'"

cancel ×

240 comments

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

my favorite pets (5, Funny)

crazybit (918023) | more than 6 years ago | (#23503216)

are Playboy bunnies.

wonder if I can clone them too...

Re:my favorite pets (1)

Deathlizard (115856) | more than 6 years ago | (#23503318)

If hollywood has taught me anything, we'll just get another Arnold Schwarzenegger. [imdb.com]

At least then he can Terminate and Governate at the same time.

Ridiculous (4, Funny)

oodaloop (1229816) | more than 6 years ago | (#23503236)

If we can put a man on the moon, I should be able to get my dog cloned for under 100k.

Re:Ridiculous (-1, Offtopic)

CastrTroy (595695) | more than 6 years ago | (#23503562)

The last time we landed someone on the moon was in 1972. That's 36 years ago. The next planned possible date that I've heard tossed around for the next manned moon landing is 2018, 46 years after the previous one. I wonder if it's worth anybody's time and money to even send someone there right now. Originally, we did it, because it was there, and because nobody had done it previously. We did it to prove to ourselves that it could be done. Now that it's been done, what reason is there for going there now? Does NASA or any other space agency have anything that could land us on the moon in the next 2-3 years? Or will it take another Apollo-like project to get us back up there. I doubt the US government would be willing to fund something like that again.

Re:Ridiculous (4, Interesting)

MRe_nl (306212) | more than 6 years ago | (#23503596)

"Your pet doesn't want to break your heart and now he doesn't have to."
Here is where the reality kicks in. We may be hearing a similar slogan very, very soon. The Financial Times informs us that the first commercial sale of a pet cloning deal has been made. A disabled woman from California, has decided to give the South Korean company RNL Bio, the contract to clone her recently deceased Pitbull Terrier named Booger. The woman has trouble walking, and besides the love she has for Booger, she also misses all the help the hound provided.

Scientists in the United States are preparing to send cells from Booger to Korea, where RNL Bio will assist a Seoul National University team, in placing these cells into surrogate mother dogs. If successful, Booger II will be born this coming October. So what will this second chance at life cost? Because the woman has agreed to make the event public, she has recieved a sale price of $50 000 USD. RNL Bio says the cost for anyone wanting to purchase the same procedure will be $150 000 USD. They are projecting the ability to clone 100 dogs next year, which will eventually lead to 500 per year.

The SNU team undertaking the project was responsible for creating Snuppy, the first cloned dog, in 2005. Some doubt surrounded the disclosure of this feat, as the team leader Hwang Woo-suk, was accused of falsifying research regarding the successful cloning of the first human stem cells. However, an investigation into the matter of Snuppy, proved that he was in fact a genuine clone.

So a $50 000 USD clone is possible as long as you are willing to "make the event public".
And this was two or three months ago.

Re:Ridiculous (5, Funny)

somersault (912633) | more than 6 years ago | (#23503830)

What were the headlines like that day?

"Now you can keep your Boogers forever!"

"Woman buys $50,000 artificial Booger"

"Chinese scientists follow God's nose, extract Booger"

Re:Ridiculous (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23503836)

fyi...it costs more than $100k to go to the moon.

Hmm...when did I hear about this before? (3, Informative)

Coopjust (872796) | more than 6 years ago | (#23503242)

Let's hope that this company has greater success [wired.com] than earlier ones [slashdot.org] ...

(Yeah, I know that the wired article says "Dead cats", but Genetic Savings & Clone was also a dog cloning company)

Or you could just breed your dog (4, Insightful)

sakdoctor (1087155) | more than 6 years ago | (#23503252)

Let's face it, you are going to have to invest the time to re-train the clone, so isn't genetically descended almost identical to genetically-identical in practical terms?

Re:Or you could just breed your dog (4, Insightful)

cephah (1244770) | more than 6 years ago | (#23503286)

Sure, but I doubt this is about anything but social status among rich people. Bragging about a cottage up in Aspen pales compared to having one of only five genetically cloned dogs.

Re:Or you could just breed your dog (5, Funny)

Hal_Porter (817932) | more than 6 years ago | (#23503304)

Let's face it, you are going to have to invest the time to re-train the clone, so isn't genetically descended almost identical to genetically-identical in practical terms?
No, the cloned dog is souless Thing That Should Not Be. Probably possesed by a demon from hell.

Imagine that a demon with the face of your best friend. Muahahaha.

Re:Or you could just breed your dog (4, Funny)

antifoidulus (807088) | more than 6 years ago | (#23503456)

No, the cloned dog is souless Thing That Should Not Be. Probably possesed by a demon from hell.

How is that different from dogs that aren't clones? *(Cat person)

Re:Or you could just breed your dog (1)

fredrated (639554) | more than 6 years ago | (#23503804)

A dog is accurately described as man's best friend, cat person, and nothing you say can or will change that.

Re:Or you could just breed your dog (5, Insightful)

CastrTroy (595695) | more than 6 years ago | (#23503922)

A dog is accurately described as man's best friend
I'm not sure how accurate that statement is. You don't hear stories of cats mauling their owners faces off. Sure a scratch or two, but nothing. Violence aside, raising a dog takes almost as much energy as raising a child, if you want to do it well. Even a well trained dog is only as independant as a 3-4 year old. If you want to have a dog, you might as well have a child. Cats on the other hand, are much more independent. Put food out for them, change the litter box every few days, and they are set. They are just as affectionate as dogs, and require much less maintenance. I'm not sure why more people prefer dogs.

Re:Or you could just breed your dog (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23504264)

Some people think that cats cannot be trained to do tricks, which is completely false. Sure it takes more effort and especially patience to teach tricks to a cat, but it's doable.

My cat knows to stand, gives paw, sit, etc.

In fact my cats knows enough tricks that she's bugging me right now so that I go feed her. She goes "meow meow" (yes, two in sequence) because I thought her "miam miam" is food.

Gotta go!

Re:Or you could just breed your dog (2, Funny)

MrNaz (730548) | more than 6 years ago | (#23504266)

Mauling is in the eye of the beholder. You call it "mauling their face off". I call it "love nipping". Don't let your opinions colour your judgment, cat person.

Re:Or you could just breed your dog (1)

rfunches (800928) | more than 6 years ago | (#23504410)

I'm not sure why more people prefer dogs.

Because I don't remember the last time a dog ran up the curtains, got into the upper cabinets, or got him/herself stuck in a tree or on the roof. You never have to look up to find a dog.

And how affectionate is a cat that doesn't come when called?

Re:Or you could just breed your dog (1)

fragbait (209346) | more than 6 years ago | (#23504460)

...because I'm alergic to cats. ...because YOU are the pet in the relationship.

-fragbait

Re:Or you could just breed your dog (3, Insightful)

Sir Foxx (755504) | more than 6 years ago | (#23504508)

Because my dog, and everyone I've ever had in my lifetime(9), will risk her life for me and my family defending us. She will not stop, until she is dead, if she feels we are threatened. No cat will/would do this. With dogs there is a true bond, with cats only an agreement.

Re:Or you could just breed your dog (1)

Akaihiryuu (786040) | more than 6 years ago | (#23504582)

I guess most people don't like having anything around the house that's smarter than they are...

Re:Or you could just breed your dog (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23504078)

No, the cloned dog is souless Thing That Should Not Be. Probably possesed by a demon from hell.
How is that different from dogs that aren't clones? *(Cat person)
The dog is on fire?

Re:Or you could just breed your dog (1)

pisto_grih (1165105) | more than 6 years ago | (#23503758)

Clearly someone didnt WTFM (watch the f-ing movie...) You Re-Pet will remember all the tricks you taught it, remember where all the bones are buried in the garden etc...

Re:Or you could just breed your dog (1)

somersault (912633) | more than 6 years ago | (#23503868)

Yep, it would be better just to have two dogs and let them have puppies or something. I think the most important thing is to get the pet at a really young age so that it develops a strong bond with you. We had a couple of cats, one was a bit friendlier than the other, she had kittens and then the kitten that we kept was even more attached to us. In fact in the end the mother and son seemed to hate each other but both of them wanted attention from me :p

Re:Or you could just breed your dog (4, Informative)

Mr. Slippery (47854) | more than 6 years ago | (#23504282)

Yep, it would be better just to have two dogs and let them have puppies or something.

No. It would be better to just adopt a dog. There is a massive overpopulation problem for dogs and cats, with over three million killed in shelters every year for lack of a home.

Please please please please please please spay or neuter, and don't patronize breeders.

exact replica of a pet is impossible (4, Informative)

wesborgmandvm (893569) | more than 6 years ago | (#23503896)

Most pet owners have suffered the loss of a very dear and special pet. And while owners would like to keep their dear friend with them forever, very few would actually go so far as to entertain the idea of cloning.


To most pet lovers, that cherished "once-in-a-lifetime" dog or cat should remain just that. In February of 2004, the AAVS (American Anti-Vivisection Society) commissioned Opinion Research Corporation to conduct a national survey to assess public opinion about cloning pets. Eighty percent of the respondents were not in favor of cloning companion animals or the selling of genetically altered animals as pets. But for the 13% of respondents that are in favor of pet cloning, financial issues may well be the obstacle.


Genetic Savings & Clone, a gene banking and cloning service for pets, is currently offering to store a treasured pet's genetic material in the hopes that the owner will take advantage of cloning that pet in the future. Currently the cost to "bank" a pet's DNA, or genetic material, with GSC (Genetic Savings & Clone) varies from $295 to $1,395 plus $100-$150 annually for storage fees. The cost for cloning is a different story. According to the GSC website, expect to pay $32,000. And to date they have only been successful with cloning cats.


Yet, for all of the technology and expense involved, exact replicas of cloned animals are not always produced. In fact, due to unusual genetics, calico cats will rarely produce clones that physically resemble the donor. Cloning opponents contend that an exact replica of a pet is impossible, as training, experience, and environment are keys to an individual's behavior and personality. Even worse animal that have been cloned often have severe health problems, and a short life expectancy.


The industry is almost totally unregulated and strong opinions on both sides of the cloning issue seek to educate the public about the benefits, or lack thereof, of pet cloning. While tremendous publicity accompanies cloning successes, the public rarely hears about animal cloning failures.


The greatest publicity surrounds the cloning of pets when actually the majority of cloning is intended for agriculture, biomedical research, and propagation of endangered species. But in all cases, there are potential commercial applications.


For example, HorseCloning.com will make a clone of your horse for $375,000 per 100 mares implanted plus a patent royalty fee of 15%, based on the estimated value of each clone. According to their web site information, "All sales are final," and "even though no one can guarantee a specific result, you could hit the jackpot." Last but not least, "due to the complexity of the science, results cannot be guaranteed."


The cloning science is similar in most species, although there are some challenges with the cloning of dogs. Dogs have poorly understood reproductive physiology compared to other species and fewer estrus cycles.


Basically, the cloning procedure begins with collecting the DNA of the animal to be cloned. The tissue is grown and the cells are preserved while being treated to prevent them from differentiating into a particular cell type (hair, skin, nerve cell).


Eggs are taken from random females for implantation, and the genetic material from these eggs is removed. Cells and eggs are fused together to become cloned embryos. Surrogate females are then hormonally treated to synchronize their fertile periods and are then implanted with the cloned embryos. In the best scenario, the surrogate pregnancy produces a live, healthy offspring.


While moral and ethical issues of cloning pets continue to be argued, both sides seem to be closer concerning the problem of endangered species. Betty Dresser, Director of the Audubon Center for Research of Endangered Species in New Orleans says, "Saving habitat may not be enough. Any tool for saving endangered species is important. Cloning is just another reproductive tool, like in-vitro fertilization." The first endangered animal to be cloned was a guar named Noah who survived only two days before succumbing to dysentery. Since then, cloning of other species has been successful, including a pair of cloned Javan bantengs, an African wildcat aptly named "Ditteaux", and a European mouflan, one of the smallest wild sheep in the world.


Environmentalists say that cloning should be the last line of defense for these animals after habitat preservation, poaching control, and captive breeding. But Dresser is adamant. "If I have to choose between extinction and cloning, I'll choose cloning every day. Extinction scares the devil out of me."

Liam (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23503254)

Liam Lynch had him cat cloned after it died.

Here is the thing... (5, Insightful)

hyperz69 (1226464) | more than 6 years ago | (#23503258)

There is no promise your pet is going to be the same pet that left you. To me this spits in the face of nature. Not that I am against cloning, but to think you can bring a loved one... even in part back from the dead is a tragic notion.

I have seen this stuff before and remember the pet may not even come back looking the same. Even if they got it looking EXACTLY THE SAME, the memories, the personality, the... soul will not be the same.

All it will do is leave you missing your loved one more. Just let it go, and keep them in your heart. Mittens / Fido will always live on inside you *Yes yes sappy but it's true and you KNOW IT*

Re:Here is the thing... (1, Interesting)

apathy maybe (922212) | more than 6 years ago | (#23503302)

Yeah, except that there is no such thing as a "soul".

------

Basically, we don't have mind or memory transfers, we don't even know how memories are stored in the brain.

So even if you get a genetically identical pet, it isn't going to be the same animal, it won't have the same memories etc.

Fuck that, don't waste your cash, get another dog. One from a pound perhaps.

Re:Here is the thing... (2, Interesting)

morgan_greywolf (835522) | more than 6 years ago | (#23503504)

First thing: yes, we actually do have some limited understanding of how memories are stored in the brain [sciencemag.org] . Are you suggesting the reverse as well, that if we somehow developed memory-transfer technology (still far off, though not outside the realm of possibility) that we could bring our deceased Fido back to life?

What about a dead friend, relative, spouse, etc.? Do you think the same owuld be true?

Disclosure: I happen to believe in the existence of a soul, but perhaps not in the way a typical Judaeo-Christian does.

Re:Here is the thing... (1)

apathy maybe (922212) | more than 6 years ago | (#23503856)

Let me rephrase that then, we only have a limited understanding of how memories are stored in the brain.

As to, can we bring someone back to life? Well no, transferring the mind of someone to another "shell" is not bringing them back to life. It is creating a copy of them.

It probably won't be an exact copy either, because you would have to force grow the clone, wipe it's present memories and implant the other ones.

While maybe possible in the future, it ain't going to happen any time soon.

So yeah, we could have a copy of a dead friend etc. Unlikely though... And all that.

(Also, out of interest, by believing a "soul", does that mean you are a dualist? That is, do you believe that there is more to the world then the "mere" physical? Do you have any proof for this, and if so, can you provided it?)

Re:Here is the thing... (1)

morgan_greywolf (835522) | more than 6 years ago | (#23504072)

So yeah, we could have a copy of a dead friend etc. Unlikely though... And all that.
Other than lack of technology to wipe the brain, force grow and transfer the memories, what else do you think makes it unlikely? Because you still seem unconvinced, despite your clearly atheistic/agnostic philosophical beliefs.

Also, out of interest, by believing a "soul", does that mean you are a dualist? That is, do you believe that there is more to the world then the "mere" physical? Do you have any proof for this, and if so, can you provided it?
I'm not necessarily a dualist, but I believe there is more to the world than the physical mundane world we see everyday, yes. Cosmologists and theoretical physicists have predicted the existence of "parallel universes." What if you exist here and your 'soul' exists in one of these parallel universes, perhaps with some sort of link? What if your 'soul' is just the link between you in this universe and you in a parallel universe? By the way, what, exactly, defines "you"? Are you just a collection of cells, chemicals and memories? What are memories made of? What are thoughts made of?

Science has not proved conclusively that there is no soul, so science doesn't say that it doesn't exist, it just says that a soul has not been observed and perhaps cannot be observed with current understanding, therefore science really has no comment on the existence of a soul. To say that there is no soul is an opinion, not a fact.

Re:Here is the thing... (1)

denttford (579202) | more than 6 years ago | (#23504356)

Dear Lord. As if that phrase isn't stupid enough - Judeo-Christian is now a noun?

Re:Here is the thing... (1)

Oktober Sunset (838224) | more than 6 years ago | (#23503634)

Yeah, except that there is no such thing as a "soul".
Yes there is, it's on the bottom of your foot.

Re:Here is the thing... (1)

somersault (912633) | more than 6 years ago | (#23503906)

I see you don't believe in homonymns

Re:Here is the thing... (4, Interesting)

oodaloop (1229816) | more than 6 years ago | (#23503324)

There's also the problem of genotype vs phenotype. Fido's genes may be expressed differently the next go-round, leading to subtle or possibly not-so-subtle differences. And as you intimated, how the clone is raised will be just as important as its genes.

But Fido could be brought back once we perfect that brain-scanning thingy in the 6th Day movie. Genotype, phenotype, and, uh...brainotype would be so close to the original Fido, that Fido 2.0 would seem almost identical. But without the scanner doohicky, Fido 2.0 will be just another dog.

Re:Here is the thing... (4, Insightful)

CastrTroy (595695) | more than 6 years ago | (#23503638)

Assuming these are purebred dogs, what's the likelihood that you could just pick up another purebred that would be just as identical? How much genetic variation is there between purebred dogs? Would the differences between the cloned dog and the original be any less noticeable than between the original, and another dog of the same breed, or possibly the same lineage?

Re:Here is the thing... (3, Interesting)

mdmkolbe (944892) | more than 6 years ago | (#23503904)

There's also the problem of genotype vs phenotype. Fido's genes may be expressed differently the next go-round, leading to subtle or possibly not-so-subtle differences.

As an example, I know two women who are identical twins, but because the split was so early, they developed in two different placental sacks (*) which means they don't look like identical twins. They look very similar, but only as much as two sisters might.

They have the same genes, but their phenotypes are definitely not identical.

(*) That's how they explained it to me, but I might have misunderstood or misremembered.

Screw Fido! I want to get my ass to Mars! (1)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 6 years ago | (#23504096)

If we develop brain scanning and want to imitate a Schwarzenegger movie, I want to see a blue sky on Mars!

Re:Here is the thing... (2, Insightful)

Eg0Death (1282452) | more than 6 years ago | (#23503332)

I totally agree with you. As much as I miss Cujo, Gus, and Scratch, I know cloning them won't bring really bring them back. Their respective personalities were formed by the people and events around them. I really wouldn't want to go through housebreaking Cujo again either . . . .

Re:Here is the thing... (1)

Hankapobe (1290722) | more than 6 years ago | (#23503362)

I have seen this stuff before and remember the pet may not even come back looking the same. Even if they got it looking EXACTLY THE SAME, the memories, the personality, the... soul will not be the same

Wasn't that part of the plot of "Pet Sematary"? I would really hate it if the clone is evil!

Re:Here is the thing... (1)

ejecta (1167015) | more than 6 years ago | (#23503432)

Pet Cemetary was more "Bury dog that's been run down in an ancient indian burial ground only for him to rise from the dead with a serious attitude problem".

Re:Here is the thing... (1)

somersault (912633) | more than 6 years ago | (#23503928)

What were people doing driving around an ancient indian burial ground anyway? >_>

Re:Here is the thing... (1)

fireboy1919 (257783) | more than 6 years ago | (#23503434)

The guy at the store assured me that it would be exactly the same because they'd imprint the memories and personality usingn a special brain scanning machine.

Have you seen the commercial [youtube.com] ?

Okay...I admit, this is from a movie [imdb.com] . Clearly the idea of cloning our pets is the first one that's really going to sell the technology (other than the obvious - organs).

Presumably, a lot of instinctive behaviour (if not most) is genetic. So your cloned dog will be a lot more like your old one than a cloned person might be.

Of course, if you could accelerate aging, you'd getting exactly what you'd want from the cloning process if you cloned a hot babe. Beauty is only cell deep, after all. :)

Re:Here is the thing... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23503436)

What on earth makes you think we are going to wait till He dies before cloning Him; we're going to be getting Him to teach Himself2 how to behave proper like. No need for Him to come back, He's never going to leave.

Re:Here is the thing... (1)

NMerriam (15122) | more than 6 years ago | (#23503450)

This comment could be subtitled "Everything I Need to Know, I Learned from Pet Semetary"

Did they solve the coloring issue? (4, Informative)

Shivetya (243324) | more than 6 years ago | (#23503500)

Because I was under the impression that cloning did not account for the individuality of each dog's coat. Another thread mentioned the irritability of a cloned bull but I doubt it was due to the cloning.

When it comes to dogs; my mother breeds, judges, and shows, a certain purebred; the bulk of good dog / bad dog behavior that owners see is largely governed by how much time the puppy had with its mother. Ideally it should be twelve weeks. This is not saying you can't breed in aggressiveness as it had been done to shepherds and the respectable breeders spent a generations (of dogs) trying to get it out.

The first few weeks in the care of a new owner will set the new puppy on his path to an individual personality. The key to getting a good dog versus a bad dog is : treat it nicely and give it space. If the new dog needs the reassurance of your company it will seek you out. Don't yell at the dog or around it. The pet is looking for acceptance and if you yell at your kids/spouse/tv etc it will affect the dog. About the "space" item, if a dog wants to get away the let it; provided of course its safe. I have seen more than one puppy returned as a nervous wreck to my parents because one kid or adult in the new owner family simply would not let the dog alone, the interesting side story is that these people took their kid to a psychiatrist who basically told them the kid was not mature enough for a pet but they tried anyway . They have their needs for rest too.

Am I against cloning pets or animals. Not if its used to protect a breed from extinction. I still would not have much qualms about it being done for the end owner. Now if cloning of pets is done for wholesale retail then that I would is nothing better than having mills. Worse is the number of bitches needed and who are basically abused to deliver the pups (I assume it still requires a womb)

Re:Did they solve the coloring issue? (1)

CastrTroy (595695) | more than 6 years ago | (#23503740)

So basically dogs are a lot like people. Kids raised in houses where the parents are yelling all the time, either at the children, or at eachother, or at whatever, tend to have more emotional problems then those who do not. Also the same holds true with giving children space. Even as babies it is important for their development not to have them in your arms 24 hours a day, let them go off and explore a safe part of the house, and play on their own.

Re:Here is the thing... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23503788)

Why the hell is pointing out obvious facts about cloning insightful? Of course there's no memory and OF COURSE it's not going to be the same dog. The only thing in common would be its genes! This is reality, not some sci-fi novel where cloning is akin to magic. What a load of blubbering rubbish.

Re:Here is the thing... (1)

hackstraw (262471) | more than 6 years ago | (#23503814)

Mittens / Fido will always live on inside you *Yes yes sappy but it's true and you KNOW IT*

The thing is that one of the things that makes life so special is that it is temporary. Why are slasher movies so popular with teenagers on dates? Basically, because it makes the girl (and boy) scared, which in turn makes them feel closer to each other.

I find our _selective_ emotional attachement to life to be almost amusing. If its cute or looks like us or it has some other kind of emotional attachment (eg, bald eagle), then lets save it!

If its not cute or if it doesn't have any value to us, then lets kill it.

But hey, if someone wants to clone Fido or their favorite spitting cockroach, its fine by me.

Re:Here is the thing... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23503848)

Why are slasher movies so popular with teenagers on dates?
Tits.

Re:Here is the thing... (1)

mdwh2 (535323) | more than 6 years ago | (#23504382)

Obviously a genetic clone is insufficient to bring back a dog who behaves the same, but:

I have seen this stuff before and remember the pet may not even come back looking the same. Even if they got it looking EXACTLY THE SAME, the memories, the personality, the... soul will not be the same.

If you could get everything the same, an exact copy, what is this "soul" you speak of? Can you define it for me?

And - whether or not it really is the same consciousness - would an observer have any way to test the difference?

Re:Here is the thing... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23504618)

Not that I am against cloning, but to think you can bring a loved one... even in part back from the dead is a tragic notion.


My dog is awesome, and she's a member of the family. That being said, I would never insult her after she's gone by trying to recreate her. I'd remember that we had a blast when she was here, and when she passes there will be a time that I'm alone and depressed.

Then, another stray will find me. That's how it works.

Now, if you want to throw the science smack down on your dog's ass, this [whatsmydog.com] might be the way to go. I had my dog analyzed, and while she looks like a Black Lab and German Shepherd mix, it turns out that she's Golden Retriever and Welsh Springer Spaniel with a little Samoyed and Black Lab thrown in.

Brace yourself for puns galore... (0, Offtopic)

stoofa (524247) | more than 6 years ago | (#23503260)

WYSIWAG... puppy and paste...

How did ... (1)

William Robinson (875390) | more than 6 years ago | (#23503270)

they take those pictures [funnydog.net] ?

dead puppies (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23503296)

So how many deformed and killed 'non viable' cloned puppies does it take to produce a successful one.

(Can you tell I am totally against this.)

Re:dead puppies (-1, Troll)

Glumac (797466) | more than 6 years ago | (#23503344)

Yes. So? Who gives a damn? How many cure furry bunnies does it take for me not to die horribly when I put cream on my face? Want to go hug a cow too? Bunnies and Dogs. People. I know what I'd choose. (And yes, you can call me "racist" ;))

Re:dead puppies (1)

Tim C (15259) | more than 6 years ago | (#23503636)

And yes, you can call me "racist" ;)

No, but I could call you "speciest", if it was a real word.

Re:dead puppies (4, Funny)

Hankapobe (1290722) | more than 6 years ago | (#23503378)

So how many deformed and killed 'non viable' cloned puppies does it take to produce a successful one. (Can you tell I am totally against this.)

Dick Cheney has to get his liquid refreshment from somewhere.

Re:dead puppies (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23503414)

So how many deformed and killed 'non viable' cloned puppies does it take to produce a successful one.

I'm guessing zero. I'm not sure about how many clumps of undeveloped cells that have the potential to become a puppy they kill though. Are you sure you aren't confusing the two?

(Can you tell I am totally against this.)

Let me get this straight: you are against this because they kill puppies, even though you don't actually know that they kill puppies?

Re:dead puppies (2, Interesting)

Animaether (411575) | more than 6 years ago | (#23503484)

I dunno - how many non-viable fertilizations, blastocysts, embryos and fetuses and indeed 'babies' (stillborn) does it take to produce a successful one?

(Can you tell I am totally against human reproduction?)

Re:dead puppies (2, Funny)

Dog-Cow (21281) | more than 6 years ago | (#23503816)

You're on slashdot. Of course you're against human reproduction! :)

Not lossless (2, Insightful)

ultracool (883965) | more than 6 years ago | (#23503312)

The cloning process is kind of lossy. A lot of mutations can occur in the process, and as a result the cloned animal is likely to be unhealthy.

Re:Not lossless (2, Interesting)

ejecta (1167015) | more than 6 years ago | (#23503532)

Between the loss of genetic material, the DNA process perhaps generating a slightly different gene structure and the different upbringing & environment I think the end result is going to be an animal that brings more sadness than joy if a persons reasons are solely to replace a lost pet.

I'm honestly struggling to see why someone would really want to clone a domestic animal, even whizz bang rare breed 5.0 would produce better offspring being bred with a similiar stud rather than it's own clone if the persons goal was generating offspring and lets face it, if you can drop $100K on a clone you can afford stud fees for breeding with a real animal.

Re:Not lossless (1)

Oktober Sunset (838224) | more than 6 years ago | (#23503656)

the cloned animal is likely to be unhealthy.
Just like a pedigree dog then.

Re:Not lossless (2, Insightful)

setagllib (753300) | more than 6 years ago | (#23503706)

Regular mating is pretty lossy too. For all we know, advancements in cloning experimentation could lead to improvements in conception safety.

It may even be the case that we will be able to submit genetic samples from two partners, regardless of gender, and have a technological process create the new genome and begin its gestation. We may even be able to select parameters in the process, such as selecting gender and which traits to inherit.

I prefer to see this as the next step up for medicine, not as "playing God". We've come a long way from caves and flint axes, and it's only the fundamentalists and conservatives who insist what we have is where it should end.

better things to do with cloning resources (3, Interesting)

Optikschmoptik (971793) | more than 6 years ago | (#23503328)

I saw them try this with a bull in the first TV episode of This American Life. The results were not good.

Synopsis: The original bull was nice. The cloned bull was irritable, short-tempered and just not quite right. Also, he kicked the owner in the balls.

I suppose you could just take from that the irony that the cloned animal managed to block its cloner's own ability to reproduce conventionally. But you could also just note that cloned bull was really ugly. You probably won't get what you wanted, unless you delude yourself into thinking you have it.

Re:better things to do with cloning resources (1)

Hankapobe (1290722) | more than 6 years ago | (#23503418)

There goes my fantasy of having Jessica Biel cloned.

Re:better things to do with cloning resources (1)

FoolsGold (1139759) | more than 6 years ago | (#23503442)

Synopsis: The original bull was nice. The cloned bull was irritable, short-tempered and just not quite right. Also, he kicked the owner in the balls.

Hmm. Sounds like my first wife. Glad I didn't get her cloned.

Re:better things to do with cloning resources (1)

maxume (22995) | more than 6 years ago | (#23503542)

From what I understand, cloned beef is now in the food supply, so they may have advanced their techniques since the show you saw was produced.

First episode, mid-2007:

http://www.thisamericanlife.org/TV_Episode.aspx?episode=1 [thisamericanlife.org]

Cloned meat in food supply, early-2008 (Wired says it already is, NPR says it is approved):

http://www.wired.com/medtech/health/magazine/15-11/ff_clonedmeat [wired.com]
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=18137332 [npr.org]

Farmer states that progeny of clones are in food supply on this page:

http://www.wired.com/medtech/health/magazine/15-11/ff_clonedmeat?currentPage=4 [wired.com]

Re:better things to do with cloning resources (1)

Yvan256 (722131) | more than 6 years ago | (#23504378)

The cloned bull was irritable, short-tempered and just not quite right. Also, he kicked the owner in the balls.
Did he name it Cartman?

Why clone your *own* dog? (1)

QuantumPete (1247776) | more than 6 years ago | (#23503334)

My neighbour's dog is a lot nicer than mine. I'd rather clone his and then we each have one. No need for the whole "you call him, I call him and we see who he runs to"...

Obligatory quote ... (1)

BlueTrin (683373) | more than 6 years ago | (#23503346)

I assumed you were just pretending to love the dog to toy with my emotions. Oh, what have I done?
*crying*

Re:Obligatory quote ... (1)

stormguard2099 (1177733) | more than 6 years ago | (#23504326)

ah, the only episode I have only watched once. All of the rest must be in the dozens by now...

better yet, accept loss and cope with life (0, Flamebait)

sl4shd0rk (755837) | more than 6 years ago | (#23503380)

It's better to grow up knowing sad things happen and finding healthy tools to deal with that...not than anyone on /. needs improved life skills or anything..

Dogs are arguably the most difficult mammal ... (1)

schwit1 (797399) | more than 6 years ago | (#23503400)

The CNN article states "Dogs are arguably the most difficult mammal to clone, according to BioArts."


More difficult than primates? Why is that?

Re:Dogs are arguably the most difficult mammal ... (1)

ejecta (1167015) | more than 6 years ago | (#23503482)

Have you ever tried slotting vials of blood with biocontainment tongs into a centrifugal separator for processing while your leg is being vigorously humped by Fido 1.0?

That's why.

Re:Dogs are arguably the most difficult mammal ... (1)

Oktober Sunset (838224) | more than 6 years ago | (#23503704)

rather that than have Bobo 1.0 chucking his faeces at me from the top of the fume hood.

Re:Dogs are arguably the most difficult mammal ... (1)

tanc (134803) | more than 6 years ago | (#23503508)

I don't have any links, but I heard it on the radio yesterday. It's something to do with female dogs ovulating randomly, and not being able to stimulate ovulation via hormones.

Just found this article which discusses it: http://www.rferl.org/featuresarticle/2005/08/a696a224-e655-4dea-acce-12bed08c63be.html [rferl.org]

Incidentally the company is partnering with Hwang Woo-suk, who was behind the cloning fiasco in South Korea, making various unsupported claims!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hwang_Woo-Suk [wikipedia.org]

Re:Dogs are arguably the most difficult mammal ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23503514)

The CNN article states "Dogs are arguably the most difficult mammal to clone, according to BioArts."



More difficult than primates? Why is that?

They're intelligent. Just look at all the primates on TV, then ask yourself that question again.

Doesn't make much sense for me (2, Insightful)

Dirk Becher (1061828) | more than 6 years ago | (#23503422)

I would rather get another dog and try to make his individual being love and respect me as the old one did and try to love and respect him for what he is. Cloning cheapens the value of the individual existence. The reason why people want copies is so they can forget about the original.

Change the color (1)

n3tcat (664243) | more than 6 years ago | (#23503430)

Can they clone my Aibo and make it black?

Re:Change the color (1)

mspohr (589790) | more than 6 years ago | (#23503608)

Sure, also, how many legs to you want?

Re:Change the color (1)

Oktober Sunset (838224) | more than 6 years ago | (#23503718)

can they clone my boyfriend and make him black?

Re:Change the color (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23503792)

can they clone my boyfriend and make him black?
Yes, but the change in colour won't affect the size of his genitals.

not convinced (1)

kiwilake (1279808) | more than 6 years ago | (#23503448)

how do you know that the dog you get back from this company will be the same as your old dog. it could just be a dog they found in a kennel which looks exactly the same as your dog. your be so emotionally involved that you wont notice.

Why just dogs... (1)

Arkheii (928123) | more than 6 years ago | (#23503462)

...and no Companion Cube cloning service?

Arnold (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23503478)

Run to de BIO ARTS INTERNATIONAL Cloning Center!!! Arghghghghghhh!!!!

Bad idea (1)

Osurak (1013927) | more than 6 years ago | (#23503570)

Dogs reproduce well enough on their own without requiring us to artificially inflate the supply via cloning.

Re:Bad idea (2, Interesting)

CastrTroy (595695) | more than 6 years ago | (#23503802)

Maybe if we just had cloned dogs, and made all dogs sterile, we wouldn't have such a problem with the dog population.

An advance of wider use than originally thought (1)

hyades1 (1149581) | more than 6 years ago | (#23503710)

This incredible technological advance could be of unparalleled value to people like my neighbor, as well as to certain endangered species. The neighbor owned a horrid little chihuahua that never learned either to shut up or, apparently, to look up.

We live on a major hawk migration route.

Get a Lab (2, Insightful)

Doc Ruby (173196) | more than 6 years ago | (#23503794)

A Labrador retriever, that is. They all look more or less exactly the same, and have exactly the same friendly personality.

Or just brave the wilds of adopting a new random dog. There's already way too many of them for anyone's good, without cloning up more in the world.

These cloning fees should include a $1000 donation to a programme that neuters 20 other dogs. If we're going to clone biodiversity out of the gene pool, we might as well get aggressive. After all, it's a dog eat dog world.

Evil Dogs? (1)

captainjamie (956435) | more than 6 years ago | (#23503872)

Am I the only one wondering what the odds are that the dog would come back evil like in Pet Cemetery? I read through the FAQs on the site and I didn't see anything about this. They would have to disclose it if there were, say, a one in ten chance that the cloned dog would turn on its master and try to kill your family, right? Right?!

What are you, specist? (1)

kiehlster (844523) | more than 6 years ago | (#23503914)

I'm allergic to furry animals. I want my favorite pet goldfish cloned. And for $100k I better get several thousand clones.

Your religion may vary... (1)

CFBMoo1 (157453) | more than 6 years ago | (#23503998)

Part of truely loving something is knowing when to let go.

Re:Your religion may vary... (1)

CFBMoo1 (157453) | more than 6 years ago | (#23504030)

I was going to type something else but something inside of me just said to simplify it. I should have adjusted the subject a bit though to make more sense with what I typed.

I Sure Hope Jake Is Where I Left Him (1)

aquatone282 (905179) | more than 6 years ago | (#23504064)

Although I think he's happier there [google.com] with a 360-degree view of the Nevada mountains and valleys he grew up in. . .

Obilig GTA Vice Cite Quote (1)

9InchRails (582001) | more than 6 years ago | (#23504182)

Coming soon, "Grandparents forever" ...

Oh sweet Jesus... (1)

L4t3r4lu5 (1216702) | more than 6 years ago | (#23504534)

Karma knock or not, it's spelled cemetery.

Lifespan and telomere problem: clone an old dog? (2, Informative)

Beerden (874601) | more than 6 years ago | (#23504550)

I have a rudimentary understanding of genetics, but I understand that telomeres are shortened with each cell division, and when they run out, no more cell division can occur. Essentially this is "old age". When an old dog is cloned, how long will the cloned puppy live? Until the telomeres can be lengthened before the initial cell division begins in the new lifeform, this seems like a cruel service. When we figure out how to lengthen telomeres in dogs, then we've pretty much got longevity treatments for humans, who can then live hundreds of years, and then not many people will be as concerned with cloning dogs as they will be about lengthening their lives.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?