Dog successfully cloned!

juliefurry

Rusty but Trusty
Joined
Mar 16, 2005
Messages
6,209
Likes
0
Points
0
Age
40
Location
United States
#1
Found another interesting article on AOL today. I'm feeling a little under the weather came on the check my messages and found this. I'm not to sure that I am for all this cloning but maybe that's just me. What are everyone else's thought?




Aug. 3) - Scientists for the first time have cloned a dog. But don't count on a better world populated by identical and resourceful Lassies just yet.



Reuters
Researchers nicknamed their cloned Afghan hound "Snuppy," which is shorthand for ''Seoul National University puppy.''





That's because the dog duplicated by South Korea's cloning pioneer, Hwang Woo-suk, is an Afghan hound, a resplendent supermodel in a world of mutts, but ranked by dog trainers as the least companionable and most indifferent among the hundreds of canine breeds.

The experiment extends the remarkable string of laboratory successes by Hwang, but also reignites a fierce ethical and scientific debate about the rapidly advancing technology.

Last year, Hwang's team created the world's first cloned human embryos. In May, they created the first embryonic stem cells that genetically match injured or sick patients.

Researchers nicknamed their cloned pal Snuppy, which is shorthand for ''Seoul National University puppy.'' One of the dog's co-creators, Gerald Schatten of the University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, describes their creation, now 14 weeks old, as ''a frisky, healthy, normal, rambunctious puppy.''

Researchers congratulated the Korean team on improving techniques that might someday be medically useful. Others, including the cloner of Dolly the sheep, renewed their demand for a worldwide ban on human reproductive cloning.

''Successful cloning of an increasing number of species confirms the general impression that it would be possible to clone any mammalian species, including humans,'' said Ian Wilmut, a reproductive biologist at the University of Edinburgh, who produced Dolly nearly a decade ago.

Since then, researchers have cloned cats, goats, cows, mice, pigs, rabbits, horses, deer, mules and gaur, a large wild ox of Southeast Asia. Uncertainties about the health and life span of cloned animals persist; Dolly died prematurely in 2003 after developing cancer and arthritis.

''The ability to use the underlying technology in developing research models and eventually therapies is incredibly promising,'' said Robert Schenken, president of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. ''However, the paper also points out that in dogs as in most species, cloning for reproductive purposes is unsafe.''

The experiment's outcome only seems to buoy the commercial pet-cloning industry, which has charged up to $50,000 per animal. The first cloned-to-order pet sold in the United States was a 9-week-old kitten produced by the biotech firm, Genetic Savings & Clone Inc. of Sausalito, Calif.

Company officials said they expect to commercially clone a dog within a year using eggs collected from spaying procedures at veterinary clinics. The South Korean researchers can surgically remove eggs from research animals with fewer regulations than in the United States.

''This justifies our investment in the field,'' said spokesman Ben Carlson. ''We've long suspected that if anyone beat us to this milestone, it would be Dr. Hwang's team - due partly to their scientific prowess, and partly to the greater availability of canine surrogates and ova in South Korea.''

But the dog cloning team tried to distance its work from commercial cloning. ''This is to advance stem cell science and medicine, not to make dogs by this unnatural method,'' Schatten said.

On scientific terms, the experiment's success was mixed. More than 1,000 cloned embryos were implanted into surrogate mothers and just three pregnancies resulted. That's a cloning efficiency rate lower than experiments with cloned cats and horses. Details appear in Thursday's issue of the journal Nature.

Like Dolly and other predecessors, Snuppy was created using a method called somatic cell nuclear transfer, or SCNT.

Scientists transfer genetic material from the nucleus of a donor adult cell to an egg whose nucleus - with its genetic material - has been removed. The reconstructed egg holding the DNA from the donor cell is treated with chemicals or electric current to stimulate cell division.

Once the cloned embryo reaches a suitable stage, it is transferred to the uterus of a surrogate where it continues to develop until birth.

Dog eggs are problematic because they are released from the ovary earlier than in other mammals. This time, the researchers waited and collected more mature unfertilized eggs from the donors' fallopian tubes.

They used DNA from skin cells taken from the ear of a 3-year-old male Afghan hound to replace the nucleus of the eggs. Of the three pregnancies that resulted, there was one miscarried fetus and one puppy that died of pneumonia 22 days after birth.

That left Snuppy as the sole survivor. He was delivered by Caesarean section from his surrogate mother, a yellow Labrador retriever.

Researchers determined that both of the puppies that initially survived were genetically identical to the donor dog.

Schatten said the Afghan hound's genetic profile is relatively pure and easy to distinguish compared to dogs with more muddled backgrounds. But dog experts said the researchers' choice of breed choice was disquieting.

''The Afghan hound is not a particularly intelligent dog, but it is beautiful,'' said psychologist Stanley Coren, author of the best-selling manual ''The Intelligence of Dogs.'' He ranked the Afghan hound last among 119 breeds in temperament and trainability.

''Many people who opt for the cloning technique are more interested in fashionable looks,'' he said. ''Whenever we breed dogs for looks and ignore behavior, we have suffered.''
 

Buckshot

Moderator
Joined
Jul 24, 2005
Messages
4,155
Likes
0
Points
0
Location
Colorado
#4
That’s scary stuff. Makes you wonder what we don’t know. How many humans have been cloned and worse, which humans. I wish we could leave well enough alone. We have the intelligence to create this technology but do we have the wisdom to use it properly?
 

bubbatd

Moderator
Joined
Nov 28, 2004
Messages
64,812
Likes
1
Points
0
Age
91
#5
I have to admit , I would LOVE a clone of my Bubba ! So would many who loved him. But, it's not meant to be, so I'll love his son, Chip of Bubba .
 

Melissa_W

New Member
Joined
Jul 26, 2005
Messages
4,290
Likes
0
Points
0
#6
I think there could be positive uses for cloning organisms (not human) such as bringing back extinct species or beloved pets, but the technology is too flawed right now. In a survey class I took, we learned all about Dolly the sheep. She had some really scary problems where she aged at an accelerated rate. But there is a difference between "cloning" as is cloning and entire organism and "therapeutic cloning", which is what makes stem cell research possible.

I think this is a great link on the Dolly and the general issue on cloning.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dolly_the_sheep

And here are some links about therapeutic cloning.
http://www.infoaging.org/b-cloning-3-therapeutic.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Therapeutic_cloning

P.S. I realize this is a sensitive topic, this is just info for anyone who is interested.
 
Last edited:

Saje

Island dweller
Joined
Dec 26, 2004
Messages
23,932
Likes
1
Points
38
#8
Did the cloned dog look like Peanut? Cuz she doesn't have any nipples or a belly button. :p
 

Buckshot

Moderator
Joined
Jul 24, 2005
Messages
4,155
Likes
0
Points
0
Location
Colorado
#9
The world, in my opinion isn't under populated. If we could stretch out mans life span for another 10 years how much more populated would the world be? I just think we need to die when its time to die. I guess on the flip side this technology is certainly being examined for use in warfare so hmmm, maybe it will balance out.
 

Melissa_W

New Member
Joined
Jul 26, 2005
Messages
4,290
Likes
0
Points
0
#10
I think I understand what you are saying Buckshot. The main reason I am into stem cell research is not to make people live longer, it's to reduce suffering. Does that make sense? Living longer is just kind of a side effect.
 

Buckshot

Moderator
Joined
Jul 24, 2005
Messages
4,155
Likes
0
Points
0
Location
Colorado
#11
Melissa_W said:
I think I understand what you are saying Buckshot. The main reason I am into stem cell research is not to make people live longer, it's to reduce suffering. Does that make sense? Living longer is just kind of a side effect.

I know there are many, many people into this with nothing but the best of intentions and I'm sure you are one of those folks. In case you haven't noticed I'm a bit of a cynic.
 

bubbatd

Moderator
Joined
Nov 28, 2004
Messages
64,812
Likes
1
Points
0
Age
91
#12
I personally am torn. I see so much benefit in stem cell research but can see so much abuse ahead. I'm not in favor of killing babies for research . I don't believe in abortion at any time. Even a spare egg and a donated sperm to me would be going against the laws of God. Yes, I'm old , and willing to learn ....teach me >
 

Rose's Gal

New Member
Joined
Nov 24, 2004
Messages
600
Likes
0
Points
0
Age
33
Location
Indiana
#13
I saw about that dog on the news today. It was really cute! :) I still don't know how I feel about the cloning. It just seems so...un-naturel, ya know?
The kind of cloning that I won't like is somebody trying to get their dear old "Fluffy" back, unstead of just getting another animal. That is the thing I'd have a problem with.
But the questions that rushed through my mind when I saw the segment on the news was: How long will the dog live? How many health problems will it have? Does it still act like a "dog" and, even more typically, like an Afgan Hound?

I was just going to say, "Imagine...if the cloning works without flaws (short lifespan, health problems, weird temperament problems, etc.) you could clone a very good example of a breed of dog and have many more good examples, and then breed them to have the "perfect" example." But then I thought, "Well, no, never mind...to much of a limited gene pool."
 
S

stirder

Guest
#14
Buckshot said:
I know there are many, many people into this with nothing but the best of intentions and I'm sure you are one of those folks. In case you haven't noticed I'm a bit of a cynic.
einstein created nuclear reactors as energy sources, best of intentions, we turned them into bombs. chinese invented gun powder to enhance festivals and parties, we kill each other with them. the car was invinted to improve people lives by making the world smaller, we pollute our world with them.
"the road to hell is paved with good intentions."

cloning to bring back fido doesnt work. clone will appear identical but its life experiences will be totally different. like identical twins seperated at birth. they have different lives and when they reunite 30 years later they are very little alike.
 

Melissa_W

New Member
Joined
Jul 26, 2005
Messages
4,290
Likes
0
Points
0
#15
bubbatd said:
I personally am torn. I see so much benefit in stem cell research but can see so much abuse ahead. I'm not in favor of killing babies for research . I don't believe in abortion at any time. Even a spare egg and a donated sperm to me would be going against the laws of God. Yes, I'm old , and willing to learn ....teach me >
That's great that you have an open mind. I'm not really prepared to be the representative for therapeutic cloning. Too much pressure! :p But the internet contains everything you might ever want to know, from both sides of the argument.

Here are a few links to get you started though, if you would like to learn more.
http://www.religioustolerance.org/res_stem12.htm
http://www.aaas.org/spp/sfrl/projects/stem/report.pdf
http://www.123helpme.com/view.asp?id=18927

And I would like to recommend this book. It's only $7.50, and it's thin, but it really packs a punch.
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/t...f=sr_1_5/104-4031232-5578334?v=glance&s=books



To me, arguing that evil people will do evil things with it is not a valid argument about why something that has many benefits should not be done. If that attitude were taken towards all things, progress would never be made. But that is just my $.02!
 

Melissa_W

New Member
Joined
Jul 26, 2005
Messages
4,290
Likes
0
Points
0
#16
stirder said:
einstein created nuclear reactors as energy sources, best of intentions, we turned them into bombs. chinese invented gun powder to enhance festivals and parties, we kill each other with them. the car was invinted to improve people lives by making the world smaller, we pollute our world with them.
"the road to hell is paved with good intentions."

cloning to bring back fido doesnt work. clone will appear identical but its life experiences will be totally different. like identical twins seperated at birth. they have different lives and when they reunite 30 years later they are very little alike.
Oh, I didn't read the end of your post stirder... Of course you are right about that. But if you raised the pup in the first place, I think they would be quite similar. But that isn't even the point. *IF* we were able to make a healthy clone (and we can't right now, to my knowledge) you would be able to replicate a dog that that had a great temperament or great talent. But this purpose is far from the most noble. I think bringing back extinct species is a more worthwhile cause. But even that pales in comparison to the potential benefits of purely therapeutic cloning (no new organism even made there).
 
Joined
Jul 28, 2005
Messages
11
Likes
0
Points
0
#17
Cloning would not mean the resulting being would have the same personality than the original one, it is one cloning of the physical aspects, not the subjective or personality nor the life experiences since these are unique and could not be matched.
 

Ash47

Taco Dog
Joined
Jan 20, 2005
Messages
3,069
Likes
0
Points
36
Location
Deep South
#18
I am in total disagreeance with cloning. I am against stem cell research also. I am young yes. I am open-minded on most things, but these are two that I am completely and totally against.
God is the Creator of all. A man cannot create another man. That is trying to play the role of God, which should never be done. Maybe there will be a physical being, but there will be no soul in that body. Someone prove to me that they are successfully cloning souls, which is the only thing that makes you you and I will take back all I just said.
Stem-cells are obtained through abortions and "test-tube babies." How terribly sad that today's society accept the fact that a woman can go and ***** herself and if she happens to come up pregnant, she can get an abortion. It also breaks my heart to hear of a woman that has been impregnated by a rapist or a relative when they did not ask to be dealt that hand in life. But, that child, be it mentally retarded or perfectly healthy, was sent here to live on this earth for a reason. Don't anyone tell me I don't know about rape. No, I have never been raped, but my best friend was a little over a month ago. It felt like it was me that it happened to. I stopped dead in my tracks and asked, "If I were raped and became pregnant, would I keep it??" Of course I would. Put it up for adoption, more than likely. I would not want to be reminded every day of what happened to me by looking into my innocent child's face. But abortion is just not the answer when there are sooooo many other options available. Plain and simple. Abortion is MURDER.

Sorry for my rant. I know you guys aren't used to that from me. ;)
 

Melissa_W

New Member
Joined
Jul 26, 2005
Messages
4,290
Likes
0
Points
0
#19
Hey Pro. I completely respect your feelings on this issue. Obviously, you have very strong feelings about it, and I would never try to change your mind. However, for others that might be reading, I would like to point out that stem cells come from leftover frozen embryos that were going to be used for in vitro fertilization. It happens when the woman gets pregnant before they can be used. These embryos will eventually be discarded if not used for another purpose. Stem cells aren't harvested from aborted fetuses, at least to my knowledge, in America or England.

I'm pro-choice and not very religious, so obviously that affects my opinion on the matter.

Hope I didn't offend anyone with my posts. As I said, it's a very sensitive issue. I only posted some links because someone was inquiring about it. But it's probably not an appropriate discussion for this board anyway.
 

Ash47

Taco Dog
Joined
Jan 20, 2005
Messages
3,069
Likes
0
Points
36
Location
Deep South
#20
Oh Melissa,
You aren't offending me at all hun. You have a right to your beliefs just as much as I do mine. I forgot where I had read it, I know it said that when the babies are killed in abortions, they take the cells that they need from them for research. I knew that about In-Vitro also. I just used the term, "test-tube." I am Pro-Life you are Pro-Choice. That is fine. We always have touchy discussions like this on Chazhound and most of the time everyone takes it really maturely. ;) No problems here!
 

Members online

Top