« The Disappeared Mayor and the Person of the Year | Main | Merry Christmas, Embera Katio. Now get out of the way, please. »

December 23, 2004

Savings and Clone

[From Justin again. Sorry about yesterday's absence. I'll spare you the explanation, a banal tale involving inexperienced internet users, pop-up windows software nobody (purposely) asked for, insidious viruses, and destroyed registries.]

The other day I said I can't fill Zeynep's shoes, but today I am going to blog on something that Zeynep would be more likely to blog about than I would on any given day. It's called 'Savings and Clone', a company that prepared a cloned cat for a woman whose cat died a natural death after 17 years. The cat, 'little nicky', was sold to Julie (whose full name won't appear because she fears cloning opponents) for $50000. The story from the CBC ends with the following:

Genetic Savings and Clone, which has cloned five cats since 2001, said it hopes to make the world's first genetically cloned dog by next May.

They expect the market for dogs to be much more lucrative.

Other companies have already created cloned mice, rabbits, goats, pigs, horses and prize cattle, which sell for about $20,000 US each.

Animal-rights activists and others condemned Genetic Savings and Clone, pointing out that thousands of unwanted cats are euthanized each year in the United States.

"It's morally problematic and a little reprehensible," said David Magnus, co-director of the Centre for Biomedical Ethics at Stanford University.

"For $50,000, she could have provided homes for a lot of strays."

I have to confess that I don't remember the source - it's either Bertrand Russell or Gandhi - but one of them said that a major problem of our civilization is the idea that because we can do a thing, we should do it. I am not sure why this sort of thing makes me uneasy, to be honest. I would be interested in readers' views on it all. The argument made in the article about the contrast between the treatment of strays and the expensive cloning is certainly appropriate. But there is something more. Maybe it's something about a civilization that is callous to mass death from hunger, preventable disease, aerial bombardment, and firepower, but tries to defeat death by a combination of technology and business, wrapped up in a pithy package called 'Savings and Clone'?

I thought I would bring it up here, since Zeynep has a topic called 'morality'.

Posted by justin at December 23, 2004 11:30 AM

Comments

"The argument made in the article about the contrast between the treatment of strays and the expensive cloning is certainly appropriate."

And not without interesting parallels to couples who spend tens of thousands of dollars trying to get pregnant while millions of children are juggled between foster families, stuck in orphanages, or worse...

Posted by: sarah at December 23, 2004 12:22 PM

I may not disagree with cloning per se, but I have to agree that this story is a little unsettling. What I find most perturbing about it is the same basic idea that bothers me most when I read about animal abuse: how does this person treat humans? It seems like Julia values her previous cat so highly that even a facsimile of it is worth more than the lives of many strays. Applying that kind of logic to a human analog could lead to some very inhumane conclusions. I guess the short and the long of it is: her cat lived a full life, why can't she offer the same opportunity to the thousands that are far less fortunate?

Posted by: Feldar at December 23, 2004 12:35 PM

As the rich get richer, and the poor get poorer, the cost/benefit analysis of making some just-for-the-rich-n-crazy product increases.

What these unobservant turds (cloners) have never thought of is that their new pet won't have much in common, at all, with their old pet.

I'm not talking about mitochondrial DNA (not really a clone unless you get that too, if you ask me), but also the nature/nurture thing.

Naughty By Nurture!

Posted by: Josh Narins at December 23, 2004 09:04 PM

Oh, and when it comes to people, I can't imagine a more horrid fate than growing up being expected to be someone else.

Although, for the record, it hasn't killed the Dalai Lama.

Om Mane Padme Hum.

There are no gods, ancestor spirits, nor reincarnation.

Posted by: Josh Narins at December 23, 2004 09:05 PM

Yeah, expensive cloning of North American pets is disturbing because research, resources, and effort should be going to much more important things. I remember Rigoberta Menchu Tum saying that she noticed that white people tend to treat their pets better than they do actual people. And there was some info from the early 90s about the amount of South American rain forest being destroyed so that cattle destined to be made into North American pet food could have pastures to graze in. Sick, sick, sick.

Posted by: deang at December 23, 2004 10:11 PM

Thanks for the comments all. I have been thinking about it more. As I said, the 'opportunity cost' is definitely a huge factor - the idea that it is a waste of resources and it shows how skewed our priorities are. But I think I figured out my other problem with it: there's really no *good* reason to do it. In a discussion of morals or ethics, the motives for doing such a thing are entirely selfish and frivolous, and the consequences are potentially severe (I read Jurassic Park before Crichton was writing silly anti-environmentalist books).

Posted by: justin at December 24, 2004 12:44 PM

yes, but justin, while your reasoning may be faultless, your basic assumption may be flawed - that ethics or morals are absolute. that there is an absolute right/wrong to anything is an assumption upon which you base your reasoning, and that assumption may not be shared by everyone. in fact, i think it is a faulty, if common, assumption.

is it ethical or moral to force another person who doesn't share your beliefs to be bound by yours?

sorry. but i think you're going to have to grapple with the idea of personal ethics probably until the day you die. that is, if you are as thoughtful as you appear to be.

thanks for filling in for zeynep - and doing a darned good job of it.

Posted by: m at December 25, 2004 11:13 AM