Attack of the Cloned Kittens

April 15, 2004 11:34 AM

Genetic Savings and Clone is the first company to offer domestic animal cloning to the consumer. For just $50,000 you can have an exact replica of Fifi or Snowball. The company's founder claims this is a boon for loving pet owners. Others aren't so sure.
posted by falconred (16 comments total)

A trained army... of vicious housecats... tweaked out on catnip... TO TO RULE THE WORLD!

* rubs hands *
posted by xmutex at 11:40 AM on April 15, 2004

Great. The Beagles from Brazil. Just what we need.

Why do I feel like this might not be a joke?
posted by chicobangs at 11:52 AM on April 15, 2004

Sweet, I've been meaning to backup my cat for some time now.
posted by emptyage at 12:05 PM on April 15, 2004

Genetic Savings and Clone is an absurd name for a serious business, but from the moment a Texas A&M laboratory successfully cloned a cat, it was obvious this capability would be productized. At least for pets.

People often point out that cloning means nothing for personality, although with dogs that are true to their breeds, this could effectively be masked. The GS&C claim to offer you an animal "very much like" your departed pet does sound plucked from The Onion. Mark Westhusin, PhD, spoke specifically of preserving superior animals and other animal-husbandry needs that typically exclude the little quirks that make your cat such a prize. The Pew presentation (PDF 1.2 MB) from Westhusin has pictures of Cc and her family, demonstrating that bicolors, for example, do not yield identical-coat clones, which could be a real dealbreaker for tuxedo-cat fans.
posted by caitlinb at 12:41 PM on April 15, 2004

Jurassic Bark, anyone?
posted by CrunchyFrog at 12:50 PM on April 15, 2004

I'm not sure if this is an elaborate hoax or not, but their Chief Scientist (Polejaeva IA) at least seems to exist in PubMed...
posted by dmd at 12:51 PM on April 15, 2004

I don't believe this is the first company to do this. I have a cousin in the South who had his dog cloned for 20 thousand bucks. He was written up in one of the national magazines, along with a few others. I emailed him and told him at least he had the decency not to have himself or his wife cloned.
posted by Postroad at 1:09 PM on April 15, 2004

The Pew presentation (PDF 1.2 MB) from Westhusin has pictures of Cc and her family, demonstrating that bicolors, for example, do not yield identical-coat clones, which could be a real dealbreaker for tuxedo-cat fans.

This is one thing that bothers me about Savings&Clone's cat cloning offer. Their page has "The GSC Guarantee – Each clone will strongly resemble the genetic donor and be completely healthy." How can they guarantee this, when tricolor cats' coats are partially determined inside the womb through X inactivation? If you clone a tricolor cat, you'll always end up with a bicolor cat, because the donor's cells no longer carry two active X chromosomes. Even if this wasn't true, since X deactivation happens randomly in the womb, a clone of a tricolor cat would never bear exactly the same pattern as the original, and even a close pattern might take a hundred random kittens to achieve. I think they must be playing fast and loose with the definition of "strongly resemble"...
posted by vorfeed at 1:13 PM on April 15, 2004

I think that it'd be cruel to knowingly clone an animal who would have problems similar to the ones Dolly had. If the clone were perfect I don't see a major problem. (Other than the fact that they're going to burn in hell, of course.)
posted by callmejay at 1:15 PM on April 15, 2004

To me, this seems like an incredibly stupid waste of money.

If your pet dies, you can't get it back. Period. If you clone it, you're just wasting absolutely insane quantities of money producing it's unhealthy and not quite identical twin, with it's own mind and past. Woo. If it turns out to be a nice animal, it's because of how you raised it, not because of any link with its very, very dead progenitor. Most of what makes a good pet is experience, not genetics. Almost any breed makes a good pet if raised correctly.

If you just want a good pet, go to the shelter and rescue a puppy. If you want one similar to the last one, get one from a breeder. It'll be almost as close as close in appearance to your dead pet as a clone, even closer in personality, and almost certainly healthier and longer lived.

Plus, you can use the other $49,950-$49,000 to save a dozen Ethiopians or something, instead of pander to your pathetic lack of understanding of basic biology.
posted by Mitrovarr at 1:42 PM on April 15, 2004

Herbert West is dusting off his resumé and hunting for a stamp at this very moment.
posted by trondant at 4:31 PM on April 15, 2004

I'm not sure if this is an elaborate hoax or not, but their Chief Scientist (Polejaeva IA) at least seems to exist in PubMed...

GS&C does exist- I used to work next door to their office in College Station, TX
posted by Uncle Ira at 5:54 PM on April 15, 2004

This is one thing that bothers me about Savings&Clone's cat cloning offer. Their page has "The GSC Guarantee – Each clone will strongly resemble the genetic donor and be completely healthy." How can they guarantee this...
posted by iamck at 8:42 PM on April 15, 2004

Uh oh, I sense that they'll soon be cloning the Gov'nah.
posted by swank6 at 10:11 PM on April 15, 2004

Jurassic Bark, anyone?

That's dolemite, baby!
posted by rafter at 10:12 PM on April 15, 2004

when discussing cloning with students in my genetics class, i generally tell them that i'd like to clone my pet cat, petey.


just so that i could name the clone "re-petey".

it never fails to amuse me. the groans of the students are gratifying indeed.

i then follow this with a discussion of why cloning an animal or person wouldn't give you an exact copy - things like education, upbringing, life experience, x-inactivation, etc. cloning einstein might give you a smart guy, but it won't give you einstein again. heck, you might just get a factory worker with white frizzy hair.
posted by caution live frogs at 7:03 AM on April 16, 2004