{

Animal CloningTo Clone, or not to Clone

Definition: a cell, cell product, or organism that is genetically identical to the unit or individual from which it was derived.

Two kinds of cells are required: 1) a somatic cell. This is taken from the animal that is to be cloned

(the donor), and is any type of cell except for an egg or sperm cell. 2) an egg cell from a female of the same species.

-The scientists then extracts and disposes of the nucleus of the female egg, because it contains the DNA of the animal that they do not want to clone.

-The two eggs are then fused together with electricity. The scientist then stimulates the fused egg and causes it to divide just as if it were fertilized naturally.

-The activated egg is place in a culture. Over the next few days, an early-stage embryo forms. At a weeks time, the embryo is transferred to a female of the species, and after pregnancy, she gives birth to a clone of the original donor animal.

Most common type of cloning: Somatic cell nuclear transfer, or nuclear transfer

Will produce more farm animals increasing the meat and dairy food. This will bring down the cost to purchase food.

Will be used to create medically important proteins like IX. For example If you have hemophilia B, you're missing or have low levels of clotting factor IX.

Scientist will be able to preserve all the animal species and clone the endangered species.

 scientist can recreate laboratory animals with diseases like cardiovascular disease  to experiment on them to find new treatment.

Cloning of pets (early death)

Pros:

A tremendous number of animals are used to produce each clone. Because 99 percent of cloning attempts fail to produce a healthy cloned animal, thousands of embryos and hundreds of egg 'donors' and surrogate mothers are used in cloning ventures.

Cloning involves invasive and painful procedures. The egg 'donors' and/or surrogate mothers are subjected to painful hormone treatments to manipulate their reproductive cycles. These animals are also subjected to invasive surgery to harvest eggs or implant embryos, and the surrogate mothers endure an additional surgery to deliver the baby.

Cons:

Few cloned animals are born healthy. Cloned animals rarely survive birth. Of the few who are born alive, many suffer health problems and die soon thereafter. One pet cloning company CEO has stated that 15-45 percent of cloned cats who are born alive will die within 30 days.

The long-term health of cloned animals is unknown. No cloned cat or dog has lived a full lifespan, so the health problems and veterinary needs they may experience later in life are completely unknown.

Animals are kept in research environments. The "donor" and surrogate mother cats and dogs used in attempts to clone a pet are typically kept in small, sterile cages.

Furthermore

There is little to no oversight of cloning activities. In the US, the pet cloning industry is not regulated like other research facilities that conduct experiments on animals. U.S. researchers and companies who clone cats and dogs for pets should be following the minimum standards of humane treatment and care for animals as outlined in the Animal Welfare Act, but the U.S. Department of Agriculture does not require them to do so. In addition, there is no way to know how many animals are used in cloning efforts beyond the published studies, or what they must endure as a result of the experiments.

Animal life is devalued. Despite the high price to clone an animal, the animals involved in the cloning process are treated more as objects. Egg 'donors' and surrogate mothers are 'production units,' and it is unclear what happens to cloned animals who fail to meet expectations.

Despite the big promises and utopian visions, animal cloning remains expensive and uncertain. Many cloned animals are born with major defects resulting from the process itself, and must be destroyed. The cost of cloning makes its use in farming and basic research economically unfeasible.

Cloning is expensive and far from certain.

The safety of cloned animals as food sources has not been established. Although the animals are in theory identical, the same forces that result in so many visibly defective offspring could also result in invisible but dangerous alterations on the cellular level. These changes could be dangerous to human beings consuming the meat, eggs or milk of the cloned animals.

The safety of cloned animals as food has not been tested.

The ethical issues surrounding cloning have not been resolved sufficiently to warrant a wholesale endorsement of the practice. The slippery slope of mastering animal cloning could entice some humans to duplicate themselves, or to create living, breathing organ farms within cloned humans. Of all the animal cloning pros and cons, this is the most frightening to most ethicists and religious observers.

The ethical issues are unresolved.

Despite years of research, over 95% of cloning attempts fail, even with extensive veterinary intervention.

Birth defects, physiological impairments, illness, and premature death continue to be the norm, not the exception, with cloning.

Seemingly healthy clones have unexpectedly developed problems.

Cloning causes severe animal suffering.

Large Offspring Syndrome, a typically fatal condition associated with a host of abnormalities, occurs in over 50% of cow clones, but in fewer than 6% of conventionally bred animals.

Hydrops, another typically fatal condition in which the animal swells with fluid, occurs in 28% of cow clones, but very rarely otherwise.

A high rate of late-term pregnancy loss, pregnancy complications, painful labor, and surgical intervention is unique to clone pregnancies.

Problems occur with cloning far more often than with any other method of reproduction.

67% of Americans disapprove of cloning animals for food.

Disapproval increases to 88% when respondents learn that animal suffering is involved.

The majority of Americans think it is morally wrong to clone animals, and 63% would not buy cloned food even if it were labeled as “safe.”

Numerous dairies, organic foods producers, and retailers have declared that they do not want to use products from cloned animals or their offspring.

The dairy industry has said that there is no consumer benefit in cloning.

Consumers are opposed to animal cloning.

Cloning affects animal welfare and promotes intensive farming practices and the commodification of animals.

Many feel that cloning is “not natural,” or is “playing God.”

Animal cloning technology can be used to clone humans or produce transgenic animals.

The public is worried about the moral and ethical implications of animal cloning

Nearly 90% of adults think the government needs to ensure that the ethical issues related to animal cloning are publicly discussed before allowing cloned animals to be sold as food.

Governments around the world are debating the ethics of cloning animals for food.

The expert European Group on Ethics concluded that there is no ethical justification to clone animals.

Americans want their government to consider their ethical concerns about cloning.

Useful in medical field High failure rate Expensive Uncertain result Will not replace traditional animal

agriculture Moral and ethical issue

Final Thoughts