A thread for you, Vicki. Cloning pets?
			Archive

Posted by: Martin ® 02/15/2002, 03:40:04 Author Profile Mail author

Dear Vicki, Since your personal life at the moment is keeping you from responding very intelligently in the Flood thread, I thought I would come up with a new thread to distract yourself from your troubles. I saw a report on the evening news that a company has successfully cloned a housecat. They say one of their chief interests is to clone endangered species, but I have my doubts because there's probably not much money in that. I think they're most interested in cloning people's beloved housepets after they die, which is potentially very lucrative. What do you think? - Martin

| Recommend | Alert

Previous | Next | Current page

Replies to this message

Responsus emotionalus
Re: A thread for you, Vicki. Cloning pets? -- Martin		Top of thread	Archive

Posted by: Christopher ® 02/15/2002, 07:14:23 Author Profile Mail author

Hi Martin, While Vicki thinks this over, I'm going to offer an entirely emotional response. My judgement on this issue is clouded by feelings, so I have no choice. Last month, just before I returned home after a year, my cat of over ten years died. For someone who doesn't have a soft spot for animals, it may not be easy to appreciate that, but I know some of you understand what it means. Cleopatra was a beautiful and affectionate cat, and seeing her was one of the real plusses for my return home. We don't know what caused her death. Cleo, and her brother who is still with us, were abandoned as week(s)-old kittens. I found them as they crawled around near a rock wall, palm-sized, eyes only half-opened, crying for mother. I found her brother first, and then saw Cleo, who had her head shoved in a small crevice in the wall. I had no baby bottle, so they were not bottle fed. They were syringe fed. It actually worked quite well--as I held them in my hand I'd wait for the inevitable, gaping-mouthed cry for food, at which time I'd cram the syringe in and inject a few cc's of warm formula milk into their belly. No nonsense. They were barely a year old when I went on my mission, and as I made the mistake of not naming them before I left, I was obliged to accept the fact that my family named Cleo's brother Christopher. Thanks to a recent influx of nephews and nieces, he now goes by Chris-kitty. My three-year-old nephew sometimes forgets that Cleo is gone and talks about her in present tense. Even blinded by emotion as I am, I just don't see any point to cloning her. A cat-lover loves a cat, or a dog-lover a dog, or whatever, because of personality and a developed relationship. I wonder if it would be frustrating to have a cat that looked just like Cleo, but who was clearly a different cat. So those are my thoughts. Chris

| Recommend | Alert

Where am I? Original Top of thread

Previous | Next | Current page

Re: Responsus emotionalus
Re: Responsus emotionalus -- Christopher		Top of thread	Archive

Posted by: grendel ® 02/15/2002, 11:24:48 Author Profile Mail author

i agree, chris. many people don't understand the difference between genotype and phenotype. same genes, different cat. grendel

| Recommend | Alert

Where am I? Original Top of thread

Previous | Next | Current page

Re: A thread for you, Vicki. Cloning pets?
Re: A thread for you, Vicki. Cloning pets? -- Martin		Top of thread	Archive

Posted by: Maude ® 02/15/2002, 14:32:07 Author Profile Mail author

I wonder how many horribly malformed little creatures they "made" before they had one suitable to Show & Tell. Loathesome people. My contempt runneth over. Maude

| Recommend | Alert

Where am I? Original Top of thread

Previous | Next | Current page

Re: A thread for you, Vicki. Cloning pets?
Re: Re: A thread for you, Vicki. Cloning pets? -- Maude		Top of thread	Archive

Posted by: shooter ® 02/15/2002, 21:49:39 Author Profile Mail author

Yep, I bet you are anti chemical also and probably don't go to Rodeos!

| Recommend | Alert

Where am I? Original Top of thread

Previous | Next | Current page

Re: A thread for you, Vicki. Cloning pets?
Re: Re: A thread for you, Vicki. Cloning pets? -- shooter		Top of thread	Archive

Posted by: Maude ® 02/15/2002, 22:50:48 Author Profile Mail author

Correct on rodeos. Define "anti chemical." Maude

| Recommend | Alert

Where am I? Original Top of thread

Previous | Next | Current page

Holy Cats Martin!
Re: A thread for you, Vicki. Cloning pets? -- Martin		Top of thread	Archive

Posted by: Vicki ® 02/15/2002, 20:06:18 Author Profile Mail author

Dear Martin, Well, this has GOT to be one of THE most embarrassing and humiliating events I've ever suffered on account of you here and very likely the most charitable as well. Actually this report was on my aol yesterday and I'll be glad to respond. It's a science question, right? I mean, this would have gone up on Forum 1...the question is would you have had the nerve to put it up there! I have, at this writing, live access to 2 cats, 2 dogs, 1 fish and 3 land turtles. Also quite an extensive collection of grave sites that hold the remains of various murder victims (due to foxes, country dogs and one vehicle runover squashing). One cat is a 14 year old female that we pump up with IV fluids every three days (the inflatable cat) and the other cat is into male dominance (which doesn't sit well with me for varied philosophical reasons) who apparently isn't aware that he has been neutered, sits in the sink and watches the fish like a television set (Sea Hunt?) and knows how to retrieve messages off the phone machine (I'm not kidding). The 2 dogs live outside and bark at anything that moves (foxes, deer, porcupines, and the wind). The 3 turtles are thoroughly disgusting yet interesting to watch. Would I clone them? Not unless I change my name to PT Barnum, wish to be in hock to the local vet for eternity, and want to hang a sign on my gate that reads..."You are now entering death valley". The love of money is the root of all evil. (see how I worked in the religious aspect?). Sure it's a lucrative venture and people will spend inordinate amounts of money to replicate their beloved pets. However... This is my philosophy (back to Forum 1) concerning pet cloning. I think you should only get one shot at life...even if you are furry,interesting to watch, purr in your sleep and answer to the name Martin. LOL! Thank you my friend! I am fundamentally messed up for the moment and you made me smile! YS Vicki Modified by Vicki at Fri, Feb 15, 2002, 20:14:32

| Recommend | Alert

Where am I? Original Top of thread

Previous | Next | Current page

Cloning and beyond
Re: A thread for you, Vicki. Cloning pets? -- Martin		Top of thread	Archive

Posted by: JAK ® 02/16/2002, 12:23:29 Author Profile Mail author

We had Dolly the sheep and now Copy Cat (CC) which have been widely publicized. To what extent there have been other very private attempts to clone or successes in cloning is surely unknown to most of us. While they have been relatively isolated scientific experiments, the benefits or dangers have hardly be identified in the few experiments which have been done. Some years ago Thalidomide was introduced to pregnant women as a medication to reduce morning sickness. Not until hundreds if not thousands of severely deformed children were born to those women was that drug made illegal for use because of its devastating effects on children whose mothers had taken the drug. Today that same Thalidomide has been used successfully in treatment of certain life-threatening cancer in patients who will never become pregnant. Hence, the side effect of deformed children is irrelevant in the present use of that drug. This illustrates how uses and applications for medical science change over time. The first experimentation with surgery on humans were not very successful. At the time of those early attempts at surgery, some condemned it as a solution for any human illness. Fortunately for us today, their view did not prevail and we have thousands of successful surgeries every day which save lives and enhance the quality of the lives those surgeries make possible. So whether I would personally wish or choose to clone my own cat(s) for personal pleasure is largely irrelevant to the central issue of cloning and all which accompanies it. The larger issue is what benefits for human health might accrue from the procedure in the longer term. We don’t know the answers to that yet. The extent to which early experiments may or may not be a great success is amply subordinate to the long-term application of that procedure. Spin-off benefits which may come from what is learned by cloning animals cannot be measured until many clones have been done. The first heart-transplants were not very successful. The first patients did not survive long. Rejection was a major issue. Today, many of the rejection issues have been solved and heart transplants are far more successful than the earliest ones. In addition, we now are able to transplant other vital organs with considerable success. There is the possibility that other animals such as the pig, etc. may offer viable organ supply for failing human organs. Such a break-through could shorten the waiting time and reduce the deaths of those waiting for a vital organ. Cloning will likely continue despite the “moral” objections of some. If and when benefits (if there are benefits), become evident and quality of life is improved as a result of experimentation with cloning, it will become more accepted -- just as organ transplants are today. The time is not very far removed that blood transfusions were rejected on “religious grounds.” Some religious groups today reject blood transfusions despite the overwhelming evidence that such transfusions do save lives which would otherwise be lost. The cutting edge of science is always controversial. People who oppose cloning will cite with great noise any failures which result in gross and visible deformity. Yet, those same people likely have no objection to the making and using of weapons, bombs, missiles, tanks -- all of which are built and operated with the express objective to kill and to cripple humans humans whom we don’t like for what ever reason. When our military kills and cripples by mistake, we call it “a tragic mistake” or “collateral damage” and quickly move on. So if there are mistakes in cloning of animals, why not call it a mistake and move on? I do not know what benefits may come from genetic engineering, but there is considerable evidence that benefits will come. Just as we did not go from the Wright Brothers first attempt to rockets into space, we will not go from the first efforts in genetic engineering to where those attempts may ultimately lead. It hardly seems appropriate to oppose ALL genetic manipulation or even cloning in particular because we don’t know all the directions in which such experimentation will lead. Some nuns have agreed to experiments with their own brains and to give their brains to science upon their deaths in order that medical science may study Alzheimer’s and other aspects of dementia. It will likely be a contribution to medical science of great importance. Finally, genetic investigation, study of DNA, and experiments leading to discovery will certainly move forward. The speed of that movement may be linked to various encumbrances -- political posturing, opponents of experimentation, and the will and persuasiveness of scientists who can demonstrate as clearly as possible the potential benefits for moving forward. What do you think? JAK

| Recommend | Alert

Where am I? Original Top of thread

Previous | Next | Current page

Why clone cats? See this link
Re: A thread for you, Vicki. Cloning pets? -- Martin		Top of thread	Archive

Posted by: Gunnar ® 02/18/2002, 02:27:14 Author Profile Mail author

It turns out that there is a reason for cloning cats besides just trying to duplicate a beloved pet to replace one that died. Many people, some of them cat lovers, are highly allergic to cat dander. The cause of the allergic reaction has been traced to a specific protein found in cat dander. There are researchers trying to breed or bioengineer a cat that lacks the gene that produces this particular protein, and clone them for those cat lovers who would otherwise have to endure the allergic reactions due to close association with ordinary cats. Would any of you cat lovers consider this a worthwhile reason to clone cats? Gunnar Related link: http://www.taipeitimes.com/news/2001/06/30/story/0000092230

| Recommend | Alert

Where am I? Original Top of thread

Previous | Next | Current page

Re: Why clone cats? See this link
Re: Why clone cats? See this link -- Gunnar		Top of thread	Archive

Posted by: Vicki ® 02/18/2002, 13:10:12 Author Profile Mail author

It turns out that there is a reason for cloning cats besides just trying to duplicate a beloved pet to replace one that died. Many people, some of them cat lovers, are highly allergic to cat dander. The cause of the allergic reaction has been traced to a specific protein found in cat dander. There are researchers trying to breed or bioengineer a cat that lacks the gene that produces this particular protein, and clone them for those cat lovers who would otherwise have to endure the allergic reactions due to close association with ordinary cats. Would any of you cat lovers consider this a worthwhile reason to clone cats? Gunnar Yes, this seems a valid reason for cloning domestic animals. You know, I saw a piece on television about goats. I think it had to do with cloning them (or was it cross breeding?) in order to extract a certain protein from their milk. I cannot recall what the benefit of the protein was..did you see it?

| Recommend | Alert

Where am I? Original Top of thread

Previous | Next | Current page

Spider silk
Re: Re: Why clone cats? See this link -- Vicki		Top of thread	Archive

Posted by: SciGirl ® 02/18/2002, 19:23:32 Author Profile Mail author

I believe the piece you saw was about the researchers who cloned the spider silk protein gene and put it into the mammary tissues of goats. The silk proteins are excreted in the goat milk and can then be harvested for a broad range of materials. (There are many types of spider silk, of course, each with different properties, which includes unusual tensile strength and its light weight, making it a very desirable material. No one has been able to figure out how to "harvest" it, though, well, I guess until possibly now.) Yes, this seems a valid reason for cloning domestic animals. You know, I saw a piece on television about goats. I think it had to do with cloning them (or was it cross breeding?) in order to extract a certain protein from their milk. I cannot recall what the benefit of the protein was..did you see it?

| Recommend | Alert

Where am I? Original Top of thread

Previous | Next | Current page

That's it!
Re: Spider silk -- SciGirl		Top of thread	Archive

Posted by: Vicki ® 02/20/2002, 17:52:08 Author Profile Mail author

Leave it to a Sci Girl to know! Vicki

| Recommend | Alert

Where am I? Original Top of thread

Previous | Next | Current page

Re: That's it!
Re: That's it! -- Vicki		Top of thread	Archive

Posted by: Christopher ® 02/20/2002, 22:19:51 Author Profile Mail author

I thought you were going to say your "sometime friend" quote had something to do with spider silk... [imagine revolving smiley thing here] Chris

| Recommend | Alert

Where am I? Original Top of thread

Previous | Next | Current page

Re: Why clone cats? See this link
Re: Re: Why clone cats? See this link -- Vicki		Top of thread	Archive

Posted by: Gunnar ® 02/19/2002, 04:36:15 Author Profile Mail author

No, I didn't see that piece, nor the one to which Sci Girl referred, which may have been the same piece. I wish I had, though. It sounds interesting. Finding a way to economically produce in quantity a substance with the strength, light weight and other useful properties of spider silk would be a wonderful achievement. Gunnar

| Recommend | Alert

Where am I? Original Top of thread

Previous | Next | Current page