Couple pays almost $100,000 to clone late dog

[rx7boi]

Pretty sweet. Technology is only going to get more advanced in the coming years.

Tons of folks talking about ethics and playing god but cloning technology, even with stem cells, isn't going away anytime soon.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/couple-p...lone-late-dog/

Laura Jacques and Richard Remde of Yorkshire, England, made headlines when they paid nearly $100,000 to have two puppies cloned at the Sooam Biotech Research Foundation in South Korea using DNA from Dylan that had been sent to the firm two weeks after his death in June. This was noteworthy for being the longest period of time after an animal's death when DNA was successfully recovered for cloning; the previous record had been five days.

The first of the two pups, Chance -- named after a character in Disney's "Homeward Bound" -- was born on Dec. 26, Boxing Day in the U.K. The second puppy, named Shadow, is due to be born Tuesday. While several hundred cloned dogs have been created over the past decade, these are among the first destined for the U.K.

"I'm trying to get my head round the fact that this puppy has 100% of the same DNA as Dylan," Jacques told The Guardian newspaper. "I had Dylan since he was a puppy ... I mothered him so much, he was my baby, my child, my entire world."

One of the main researchers at the facility, Hwang Woo-suk, is a controversial figure in cloning. In 2004, he and former colleagues at the Seoul National University made claims in the journal Science that they created the first cloned human embryos and extracted stem cells from them, but their report was later discredited. In 2009, he was convicted of embezzling research funding as well as illegally buying human stem cells for this research.

Hwang announced the first successful dog cloning in 2005 -- an Afghan hound called Snuppy. Since then the Sooam Biotech Research Foundation has cloned hundreds of animals, including dogs, pigs and cows.

The proud couple in Britain took to social media, to provide tweet-by-tweet updates of the arrival of Chance. They created a Twitter account dedicated to the memory of Dylan -- @WeLovedDylan -- that gave the updates. They have since created an account for the new arrival, which is @ShadowIsMyTwin.

Cloning has generated controversy ever since the first cloned farm animal -- Dolly, the sheep -- was born in 1996.

[Seth1968]

Originally posted by rx7boi
Pretty sweet. Technology is only going to get more advanced in the coming years.

Tons of folks talking about ethics and playing god...

This playing god argument is derived in ignorance and hypocrisy, as everyone makes "playing god" decisions every day. It could even be argued that free will is playing god.

Religion: Oppressing human intelligence since day 1.

[rob the knob]

Originally posted by Seth1968


This playing god argument is derived in ignorance and hypocrisy, as everyone makes "playing god" decisions every day. It could even be argued that free will is playing god.

Religion: Oppressing human intelligence since day 1.

what does that mean? everyone everyday?

[Seth1968]

Originally posted by rob the knob


what does that mean? everyone everyday?

I thought I made that clear, but making a decision (like taking medication for example) is an attempt at changing God's will (playing god). The same argument could be applied if you save someone from drowning.

If you take the playing the god argument to its full extent, then the act of making ANY decision is playing god.

[mazdavirgin]

Originally posted by Seth1968


This playing god argument is derived in ignorance and hypocrisy, as everyone makes "playing god" decisions every day. It could even be argued that free will is playing god.

Religion: Oppressing human intelligence since day 1.

Oh please if it wasn't for religion we would have lost a whole ton of knowledge over the years. Not to mention the original formation of universities was a direct result of religion. One can argue about the merits of religion all day long but this bull shit argument about religion holding back science is naive at best and straight up foolish at worst. People who have no concept of history always spew crap about how much more advanced we would have been forgetting that most of the knowledge/writing we now have from early periods is a direct result of religious institutions working to preserve knowledge.

On the topic of cloning there's a reason they are only doing this in places like Korea/China...

http://learn.genetics.utah.edu/conte.../cloningrisks/

It's all fun and games till your cloned animal keels over dead after you spent a few millions dollars. Not to mention the bioethics issues around creating animals which are clearly genetically defective as seen in the number of issues resulting in cloned animals...

But Hawthorne cited another concern: a certain percentage of the puppies suffered from "physical abnormalities," which led him to conclude that it's not a consumer-ready technology. He also accused RNL of mistreating their dogs, saying that the low price of their cloning service could only mean that surrogate dogs were not adopted out and unwanted puppies were not being cared for in perpetuity; according to Hawthorne, RNL must be terminating the unwanted dogs. SNU's lab does not release the number or nature of attempts made before the birth of a successful clone, which might be a disturbing thought to cloning clients who truly believe that their dog's spirit is reborn in each clone.

Then there's the whole thing about how current cloning techniques do not produce a clone that is even as close as twins due to the addition of different mitochondrial DNA.

Frankly personally I don't care but anyone who knows anything about the process of cloning and treatment of animals would be pretty naive to think this is an ethical process. It's way worse than puppy mills.

[msommers]

While I think it's absolutely asinine to spend that kind of money on a dog, it's fascinating to see where we are in the realm of technology. CRISPR is another tool that is going to change our lives forever.

[JustinMCS]

I am a dog lover, but I am not sure I would want the same dog twice, wouldn't you want to experience the personality of another dog afterwards?

[Seth1968]

Originally posted by mazdavirgin


Oh please if it wasn't for religion we would have lost a whole ton of knowledge over the years. Not to mention the original formation of universities was a direct result of religion. One can argue about the merits of religion all day long but this bull shit argument about religion holding back science is naive at best and straight up foolish at worst. People who have no concept of history always spew crap about how much more advanced we would have been forgetting that most of the knowledge/writing we now have from early periods is a direct result of religious institutions working to preserve knowledge.

Ya right. Universities that mainly trained priests and generally opposed anything that wasn't in line with church dogma.

Also, for every 1 legit example you can provide that religion expands knowledge, there are 100 examples of religion oppressing knowledge and human rights.

[cancer man]

Originally posted by Seth1968


Ya right. Universities that mainly trained priests and generally opposed anything that wasn't in line with church dogma.

Also, for every 1 legit example you can provide that religion expands knowledge, there are 100 examples of religion oppressing knowledge and human rights.

Church created science dimwit.

[Seth1968]

Originally posted by cancer man



Church created science dimwit.

Ya, the church created empirical evidence.

[D'z Nutz]

Originally posted by JustinMCS
I am a dog lover, but I am not sure I would want the same dog twice, wouldn't you want to experience the personality of another dog afterwards?

That's the misconception of cloning. A clone of something implies that only the DNA is identical. What the clone is taught, how it's raised, and different experiences it goes through in its new environment pretty much guarantee it will have a its own unique personality.

[Xtrema]

Originally posted by JustinMCS
I am a dog lover, but I am not sure I would want the same dog twice, wouldn't you want to experience the personality of another dog afterwards?

You get different personality even in with the same litter. Cloning only guarantee pure linage, it's not the same dog.

All pure bred is us human playing god. The ethical argument here is much like pure bred, you are breeding a mutation that should have never existed or be taken care of by natural selection. So there will be genetic problem down the line if you keep cloning the same dog.

That said, China will own the forth coming century because they will do anything for a buck. So these scientists who get objections from western world will get way more funding and way longer leash to try new things in China.

[AndyL]

If I had the $ - I'd be having Cody #2 cloned right now... But he's definitely a one of a kind. (And feral reserve rescue - so who knows what mixes he is)

[codetrap]

.

[AndyL]

Yeah costs about 50$ - but its not like one would custom breed the grand parents then the parents then the dog desired

So cloning could be logical for a mutt like mine...

I should create a gofundme lol

[Seth1968]

The discovery of the human "source code", naturally leads to the manipulation of that code. Said manipulation could result in the elimination of disease, a much stronger human, or 150 year old grandparents still alive and having sex.

All of those conclusions repulse me

...but the argument of "playing god" to thwart such a position? OMG lol. Such people bled too much blood on Mr. Freeze's plastic razors.

Like the bible says, you're going to need some leaches, stoning, and a dash of torture to invoke compliance.

Ya, you probably don't even want to get me started on the new testament.

BTW- The natives want compensation, the blacks want compensation. Slavery they claim!

Uh huh. Both want compensation for something they were doing long before the Europeans or Orientals arrived.

[funkedelic2]

Originally posted by JustinMCS
I am a dog lover, but I am not sure I would want the same dog twice, wouldn't you want to experience the personality of another dog afterwards?

I believe that the cloned dog would have a different personality. It would be the same in terms of DNA but it wouldn't be identical.

[Cos]

Originally posted by funkedelic2


I believe that the cloned dog would have a different personality. It would be the same in terms of DNA but it wouldn't be identical.

Yeah I don't really get the point. So you have an identical dog, but the dog isn't identical in its own head. All those things died with the first dog.

Now if you could download its brain, I'd be all for it. Just a new shell for the dogs existence.

[Nismorphed]

That is so dumb.

[Darell_n]

Originally posted by Cos


Yeah I don't really get the point. So you have an identical dog, but the dog isn't identical in its own head. All those things died with the first dog.

Now if you could download its brain, I'd be all for it. Just a new shell for the dogs existence.

If this was a story about a 2 yr old child that died in an accident, I'm sure many people would have a different opinion about having an opportunity to clone a loved one. I'm not a dog person at all but I know many that treat their dogs like children.