i used to live there. $50k to clone a pet.
Posted by Amka (Member # 690) on :
Actually, it makes me kind of sick.
Really. I heard about a person doing this yesterday.
Putting that much money towards getting back the genetic equivalent of one pet is just wasteful. Donate the money to a charity, for heaven's sake. If it is for your pet, dontate it to the humane society or something like that.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
How do you feel about people who spend that much money on adoption agencies or fertility treatments?
Posted by RackhamsRazor (Member # 5254) on :
There is no need to clone a pet when there are tons of animals waiting to be adopted. Dont these people know that their pet wont be EXACTLY the same. It might look like Fido but I seriously doubt it will act like Fido
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
I realize the ethical qualms, but for some reason it doesn't bother me that much. Just because I wouldn't personally utilize the service, doesn't mean that it shouldn't be allowed. The animals won't be the same as deceased Fluffy, but I think that the owner will quickly realize the new animal has a different personality if the personality is drastically different, though in a purebred animal where personality characteristics are more consistent it would be less obvious. (then would they be clamoring for a refund?)
Also, particularly with show dogs, you could give another dog the exact same genetics and because of unique fetal development come out with different structural angulations of bones than the original.
*shrug*
AJ
Posted by Zeugma (Member # 6636) on :
If people could spend $50K to bring a beloved pet back to life for another 15 years, I wouldn't really question it.
That's not what this is, though. They'll get dogs that look identical to their pet, but personalities are shaped by too many factors to make this any more valuable than getting another similar-looking pet from a shelter or breeder.
Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
And with cats, the same genetics can result in a different coat in different animals. Really different.
Posted by MrSquicky (Member # 1802) on :
Amka, If you're going to get upset about people spending an inordinate amount of money on things, I don't think that pet cloning should really be on list of your top 100 concerns, but that's just me.
There's so many much more watseful things that people don't need to spend money on. In the grand scheme of things (heck, even in the pretty small scheme of things) this is almost nothing. I applaud the sentiment, but how about we talk about, oh, I don't know, professional sports or the whole conspicuous consumption thing rather than people devoted to their pets? It's a luxury, like so many other luxuries. However, not only this luxury have a pretty small clientele, but it also has some more useful/interesting implications.
[ February 10, 2005, 02:47 PM: Message edited by: MrSquicky ]
Posted by RackhamsRazor (Member # 5254) on :
the only people I could see benefiting out of this would be people who earn money by showing their animals. Still, can they even make that much money from winnings to make the cost of cloning worth it?
Posted by MrSquicky (Member # 1802) on :
So, in that smae vein, tell me who benefits from buying jewerly, or a luxury car, or going to really expensive restaraunts, or spending $4,000 dollars to go to the Superbowl?
Posted by Ben (Member # 6117) on :
MrSquicky i feel you are trying to prove a point but i can't figure out what it is. Maybe you could let me know?
[ February 10, 2005, 02:50 PM: Message edited by: Ben ]
Posted by MrSquicky (Member # 1802) on :
Ben, Screw Flanders.
Posted by mothertree (Member # 4999) on :
I feel like I'm out of the loop on whatever you two are talking about, but Squick seems to be saying if it's okay to spend $4,000 on a, what,5 hour event, it's okay for someone to spend $50,000 on a 15 year or so companion.
The thing is, I don't think clones are physically identical. Wasn't that one of the things about Dolly? And I don't think the telomere problem has been sorted out. That is, you have about 20 years minus the number of years your pet lived to. But if you just really like the young and cute phase, I guess that's okay.
People already spend thousands and thousands of dollars on specialty pets. I agree it's sickening, but no more sickening than most other consumer items in our culture.
(Remember "Father of the Bride" and the $250 per plate wedding?)
[ February 10, 2005, 03:10 PM: Message edited by: mothertree ]
Posted by Ben (Member # 6117) on :
Screw Flanders Screw Flanders Screw Flanders Screw Flanders Screw Flanders Screw Flanders Screw Flanders Screw Flanders...back to topic at hand. My coworker just mentioned that he is going to watch for this town to be burnt to a crisp resulting from an electrical storm as a result of this clinic's existence. i on the otherhand am indifferent on the matter. my indifference should bother me...
[ February 10, 2005, 03:34 PM: Message edited by: Ben ]