Cloned Pets - Bioethics @ TIU

TLC aired a special called ?I Cloned My Pet? that traces the journey of three former pet owners through the process of cloning their beloved pet who had died (see here and here). Watching the interviews with the pet owners, particularly Danielle, the owners sought cloning in order to bring their beloved pets back rather than deal with closure and the loss of their pet. However, my interest is less in the psychological factors and more in the technology and appropriate use of technology. I understand that there is a psychological factor here, but I think it is important to look at how technology is being used and if it is ethical.

?

Our society finds solace, comfort, and sometimes salvation in technological progress. It is the cultural air that we breathe. When having to deal with some of the most devastating things in life, we turn to technology to help us: reconstructive surgery after a severe accident, IVF for infertility, cosmetic surgery for the effects of old age, arthroscopic surgery for joints, and a myriad of other technologies that are used every day in hospitals. Thankfully, we live in a world where many of these technologies are available, and people who have had to deal with trauma or sickness can benefit from them. However, our technological capabilities also raise questions, such as distinguishing the difference between therapeutic and enhancement technologies. Now let us add that technology can help a former pet owner deal with the loss of a beloved pet by cloning.

?

Distinguishing between therapeutic and enhancement technologies is an area that many bioethicists are working on. There is most certainly a gray area here; not all of the above technologies are strictly therapeutic, however some may argue that they have psychologically therapeutic effects. However, there are similarities between certain technologies listed above. IVF and cosmetic surgery seem to be marketed differently than the other technologies. Infertility and the effects of old age are very emotional topics, and it seems that the reproductive industry and the cosmetic industry banks off of people?s fragile emotional state. That is where I see a similarity between those industries and cloning a pet. I believe all three of these industries sell happiness (or solace or security) to people.

?

The way the former pet owners talked in their interviews, it is as if they believed cloning would bring their pet back to them. And they evidently believe this strongly enough that they are willing to pay $100,000 price tag for it ($50,000 for the people on TLC per an agreement with the South Korean cloning company). Let?s examine the technology:

?

1. Cloning is a very inefficient process, so much so that Ian Wilmut, the scientist whose team cloned Dolly the sheep, has abandoned the notion of human cloning (he moved on to ESC research). For every one successful clone, there were hundreds of botched clones. Many were botched at the embryonic or gestational stage. Some had severe abnormalities at birth. Less than 1% of clones are successful (this is a very generous estimate), so for everyone 1 successful clone 99 (or more) had to die.
2. Cloning does not make a copy of the original. One of the pet owners was hoping that his cloned dog would recognize him. This is not possible. A clone is analogous to an identical twin that is displaced in time.* Anyone who knows identical twins knows that you end up with two completely different individuals. It is unclear to me if the cloning company is up-front about this, or if it allows people to believe whatever they want to believe, including the idea that the clone has some of the memories of the original. This is visually seen when we look at other cloned animals. The coat color does not always match the original animal because environmental factors play a role.
3. Dolly the sheep, famous for being not only the first cloned mammal, but also the first healthy cloned mammal that could reproduce, died an early death from age-related issues. Dolly started developing problems with arthritis and other age-related issues when she was only six years old (normal life span is about eleven years old). Very little has been reported on the longevity of a cloned mammals, but the idea is that cells have a shelf life. They cannot go on replicating indefinitely. Again, it is unclear to me whether the South Korean cloning company has been able to fix this ?little? problem of old DNA and shorten life-spans or not. The former pet owners were obviously very upset over the loss of their pet the first time, and rather than move on, they have opted to clone their pet. If the clone?s lifespan is expected to be much shorter than normal, comparable mammals, this sets them up for further disappointment, let alone reliving the loss of their pet. Cynically, this does set the cloning company up for repeat business

*Technically, once the DNA starts replicating, identical twins do not have identical genomes.

Finally, aside from assessing the technology, there is a stewardship issue here. I have always had pets. Growing up we had a variety of cats, dogs, birds, hamsters, lizards, and even a chinchilla. I loved all of our pets, and each one seemed to have its own little personality. I currently have an incredibly sweet cat and a rather clumsy aquatic turtle. I had adopted my current cat when she was about a year old from an animal shelter, and she truly has been one of the friendliest, most docile cats I?ve ever had. ?For people that have a soft spot for caring for domesticated animals, there are a lot of animals that need homes. Here in Texas, we receive quite a few displaced animals from natural disasters. Given the inefficient and expensive cloning procedures, it seems that the best way to care for animals is not to clone them, but rather to consider caring for another animal. Animals are not people, and while I would not necessarily be so bold as to recommend adopting a child because that is a big decision for a couple to make, animals are always adopted. So, if these owners would like to have a pet, why not adopt one of the thousands of animals that are too domesticated to survive in the wild? The answer is likely that these pet owners want their old pet back. Unfortunately, no matter what the cloning company promises them, they are still adopting a completely different pet than their original.

Source: http://blogs.tiu.edu/bioethics/2012/01/16/cloned-pets/

the darkest hour neverland shaun white phoebe prince marlins marlins kourtney kardashian pregnant