oppose CLONING?

This is a forum to discuss legislation and legal matters pertaining to the rights and welfare of dogs. Please remember to counter ideas and opinions with which you don't agree with friendly and helpful advice and responses.

(Page 1 of 2: Viewing entries 1 to 10)  
Page Links: 1  2  

Barked: Fri Oct 14, '05 12:58pm PST 

good site

Puppy Power!
Barked: Fri Oct 14, '05 1:36pm PST 
I'm against it. I know that when your pet passes away, its very hard and you want them back. But the point of having a pet is that, that certain pet was special and unique in its own way, and cloning is just like.. defeating the purpose. There would be no more uniqueness or individuality (this is just speaking in general, not just with pets either). I think life is fine how it is, and unless they're putting cloning to use for helping the food supply in, say, countries that need it, more power to them. But just cloning just to clone is wrong, in my opinion.

For Rio--Cysts- Be Gone!
Barked: Fri Oct 14, '05 1:48pm PST 
I strongly oppose pet cloning, too....as Jamie said, it takes away the uniqueness of your pet if your pet is cloned...every pet is special in their own way and cloning is making that "specialness" go away.

Member Since
Other posts by this user
Barked: Fri Oct 14, '05 4:22pm PST 
wat is funny people think they will have the same trait as your dog but they dont it just looks like your dog

*u follow wat i said*

A Doggie Scholar
Barked: Fri Oct 14, '05 4:27pm PST 
I don't really care. I don't think my mommie would ever clone me (it's not cost effective, for one, and she really sees no reason to clone me), but if someone wanted to clone their pet for one reason or another, she's not going to go over and give that person a long lengthy lecture.

After all, your genes do give you your basic characteristics, but what ultimately defines you as a dog (or a person for that matter) are the culmination of experiences you went through. Those experiences and the habits we develop from them make us unique. There could be a million cloned Snowys and we'd all be unique, different, and have different "meanings" behind us.

In some way, identical twins are "naturally" cloned human babies. Are each members of twins or triplets of quadruplets less of a person because they have one or more genetically identical sibling? Do they grow up being exactly the same, and not have any kind of uniqueness that might help you distinguish one from the other? I think not.
Kaltag "Kallie"

Mushing in the- SNOW!!!!!
Barked: Fri Oct 14, '05 4:43pm PST 
It depends. I can see how cloning can help rare breeds and such, but I don't like cloning if you loose Fifi and want her back. You can never get the same dog twice, even cloned. All dogs are different.
Sabrina- 2000~2012

To break- injustice we- must break- silence
Barked: Fri Oct 14, '05 5:24pm PST 
If your dog doesn't have a solid color coat, it won't even look the same! Spots and stripes and brindle colors will be in different places because they are determined in part by your environment (ie cell movement during blastulation stage).

And clonig rare breeds won't necessarily help. One problem you might run into is that certain animals for whatever reason are going to be easier to clone than others. So say you have a rare breed made up of a population as follows (for those of you who know lots of genetics, I'm using a mitochondrial DNA model so we can consider everything as haploid since mitochondria are passed down only through the mom):

Initial population: A A A A A B B C D E

In this population type A makes up half of the population. Lets just pretend that type A has some sort of beneficial gene... let's pretend it has the gene for resistance to canine flu or something but that the population hasn't actually been exposed to the flu yet. Types B C and E don't have this resistance, but are still present in the population.

Say that by chance it is easier to clone the B and E dogs but you do get clones of all of them. If you clone those dogs a few times and re-introduce them to the initial population (we'll pretend there were no new offspring other than the clones during this time) you'd have:


See how the population has changed? Now instead of it being 50% As it is now only 30% As. You can imagine that if this population were to breed that there would be lots fewer As than the first population. And instead of 20% Bs and 10% Es in the first population it's now 25% Bs and 25% Es.

Then say that the canine flu comes around to this population... more of the animals will be wiped out because they won't have the A allele. Thereby rendering null all your attempts to help by cloning.

This same type of problem occurs in nature when populations get small enough you get genetic drift. Or if a small group of individuals establish a new population it is called a founder event. It can be called Inbreeding Depression, too.

So the best way to help out rare dog breeds would be to protect them and try to help them all out to breed better. Like get more breeders interested and stuff, make sure they're getting awesome vet care and food and everything. If need be, look to the history of the breed and bring in some new genetic diversity by breeding with some of the ancestors of the breed (like bringing in Texas Panthers to help Florida Panthers with the reproductive problems, crooked tails and cowlicks). After all, it stays in the spirit of the breed to go back and introduce ancestor genes as they probably had some of them in the beginning after all. However, then you have the problem of then they can't be registered and all like the Florida Panther problem (since they have some Texas panther blood they can't be considered as separate management units so there is less funding for conserving them), but you know what, you're gonna have problems no matter what.

And since you'll have problems no matter what, there are much cheaper and more efficient ways to try to save rare breeds and species than cloning individuals.

I'll get off the chalkboard now, sorry! Can you tell I'm a conservation geneticist/molecular ecologist?
Freebee- (Free)

Barked: Sat Oct 15, '05 4:23pm PST 
I dont see the point. cloning for organs that can help people and animals stay alive,yea I'm all for it. but trying to duplicate your pet is a worthless endeavor. you WONT get the same animal unless it is brought up in IDENTICAL circumstances...what are the odds of that?

and identical twins are not identical, in the personality dept. there are cases of twins being seperated and reunited, only to find they had the same interests and clothing tastes....and physical features, but I think those are exceptions, and not rules.

cloning is a physical thing. like identical twins. personality, with some basic exceptions, is mostly learned by growth experiences
Kaltag "Kallie"

Mushing in the- SNOW!!!!!
Barked: Sat Oct 15, '05 5:16pm PST 
Free, twins are genetically identical smile.
Freebee- (Free)

Barked: Sat Oct 15, '05 6:16pm PST 
genetically, yes...emotionally, personality wise? no. they are not the same person
  (Page 1 of 2: Viewing entries 1 to 10)  
Page Links: 1  2