Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Get the Family Dog Cloned

Posted by samzenpus on Thu May 22, 2008 06:55 AM
from the love-them-twice-today dept.
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.'"
+ -
story

Related Stories

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • by crazybit (918023) on Thursday May 22 2008, @06:58AM (#23503216)
    are Playboy bunnies.

    wonder if I can clone them too...
  • Ridiculous (Score:5, Funny)

    by oodaloop (1229816) on Thursday May 22 2008, @06:59AM (#23503236) Homepage
    If we can put a man on the moon, I should be able to get my dog cloned for under 100k.
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      "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
  • by Coopjust (872796) on Thursday May 22 2008, @07:00AM (#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)
  • by sakdoctor (1087155) on Thursday May 22 2008, @07:02AM (#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?
    • by cephah (1244770) on Thursday May 22 2008, @07:05AM (#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.
      • by tobiasly (524456) on Thursday May 22 2008, @09:53AM (#23505404) Homepage

        What I'm curious about is whether the cloned dog will smell exactly like the original to other dogs. Scent is more important to dogs than sight; that butt-sniffing ritual they perform when they meet each other lets them remember each other for a long time. Smelling another dog's urine will let a dog know who the other dog was, whether it was male/female (and if the latter, where it was in its menses), whether it was sick, etc.

        So if I cloned Aloysius, would my other dogs think the new dog was him? If I cloned him while he was alive, would he think he was smelling himself?

          • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

            What about diet, etc? Diet is a major part of the metabolic pathway that goes into the smell of urine. Your dogs metabolism will change throughout its life so if it were alive it wouldn't thing the clone was it.

            You're thinking like a human. :) We are very far away from understanding how dogs process smell. For one thing it's very difficult for us to comprehend the concept of smell being the dominant sense.

            I read as an example somewhere to consider a pot of chili cooking on the stove. To us humans it smells like a pot of chili. To a dog, it smells like ground beef, tomatoes, individual spices, etc. They can pick out each individual ingredient by its smell, even after they're combined.

            That's why you can't fool

    • by Hal_Porter (817932) on Thursday May 22 2008, @07:09AM (#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.
      • 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)
          • by CastrTroy (595695) on Thursday May 22 2008, @08:07AM (#23503922) Homepage

            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: (Score:3, Funny)

              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: (Score:3, Insightful)

              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.
            • by KermodeBear (738243) on Thursday May 22 2008, @09:08AM (#23504708) Homepage

              If you want to have a dog, you might as well have a child.
              Are you kidding me? Children:
              * Can't be potty trained for over a year. A dog takes a few days.
              * Can't be left alone for a few hours. A dog is perfectly fine by himself.
              * Are extremely expensive. Dogs are very cheap in comparison.
              * Will turn into teenagers and dress in all black to spite you. Dogs are always affectionate.

              Dogs are way better than human children, and they're a hell of a lot cuter, too. I have no idea why humans breed these days, at least here in the US.

              I'd have to disagree that cats are 'just as affectionate' as dogs. I have lived with both. I have also lived with horses, rabbits, cattle, snakes, mice, fish, ferrets, and a few other critters. None of them are as affectionate or attentive as a dog. I would put horses or ferrets second.

              Dogs are designed to be pack animals. Cats are designed to be independent loners. One is going to be more affectionate and social than the other by default. Sure, there are always exceptions, but in general, I've found this to be true.

              Cats are great if all you want is a fuzzy companion walking about that doesn't require maintenance, and if your living space is limited. Dogs are great if you want more interaction, and don't mind the extra work and you have more room.

              I would never, ever keep a dog in an apartment or a small house, not even one of those little ankle biters. Dogs need some room to run around.

              That said, dogs really aren't all that much work. I have three dogs right now. I put out food for them to eat as they wish, I change the water twice a day, and they have a doggie door out into a fenced yard if they want to pee or whatever. Check over the yard every day or two and pick up any poop, only takes a few minutes to clean up. It works really well.

              I've also never seen a cat play fetch, play tug of war, warn strangers, get my slippers, etc., etc. Dogs have a more advanced brain (I'm not going to dig up the articles, but you can find them if you want) and are simply capable of more. Cats are more hard wired. Granted, automatic potty training is a plus, but beyond that your options are limited.

              Another reason I prefer dogs? They're awesome kissers. (o:
            • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

              A cat always looks down on you. A dog always looks up to you.

              A pig looks you in the eyes and recognizes you as an equal,
    • 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

  • by hyperz69 (1226464) on Thursday May 22 2008, @07:03AM (#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*
    • by oodaloop (1229816) on Thursday May 22 2008, @07:13AM (#23503324) Homepage
      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.
      • by CastrTroy (595695) on Thursday May 22 2008, @07:46AM (#23503638) Homepage
        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?
      • by mdmkolbe (944892) on Thursday May 22 2008, @08:06AM (#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.

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      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 . . . .
    • 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!

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

      • 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-Christ
  • dead puppies (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 22 2008, @07:07AM (#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.)
    • by Hankapobe (1290722) on Thursday May 22 2008, @07:20AM (#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: (Score:3, Interesting)

      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?)
  • Not lossless (Score:3, Insightful)

    by ultracool (883965) on Thursday May 22 2008, @07:10AM (#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: (Score:3, Interesting)

      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 per
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      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 "playin
  • by Optikschmoptik (971793) on Thursday May 22 2008, @07:13AM (#23503328) Homepage

    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.

    • There goes my fantasy of having Jessica Biel cloned.
    • 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.
  • I assumed you were just pretending to love the dog to toy with my emotions. Oh, what have I done?
    *crying*
  • The CNN article states "Dogs are arguably the most difficult mammal to clone, according to BioArts."


    More difficult than primates? Why is that?

    • 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.
  • 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.
  • Can they clone my Aibo and make it black?
  • Get a Lab (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Doc Ruby (173196) on Thursday May 22 2008, @07:57AM (#23503794) Homepage Journal
    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.
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

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