Pet-Clone Sales Spur Call for Ban

Maryann Mott
for National Geographic News

February 23, 2005

Animal-rights activists stunned pet-cloning companies last week by seeking both state and federal restrictions on the small but growing industry.

The American Anti-Vivisection Society (AAVS), a Pennsylvania organization that monitors the treatment of animals in laboratories, worked with California Assemblyman Lloyd Levine to introduce a bill to ban the transport and sale of cloned and genetically modified pets in California.

If the bill passes, it will be the first of its kind in the United States.

In recent years science has raced ahead to create unique breeds of pets. Today animal lovers can buy clones of dearly deceased cats, or newly engineered red fluorescent fish for their aquariums. Soon, hypoallergenic felines—cats that have little likelihood of causing an allergic reaction in humans—will be available.

The AAVS accused pet-cloning companies of operating behind a veil of secrecy. It also requested that the U.S. Department of Agriculture regulate the companies like it does research laboratories that must comply with the Animal Welfare Act, which sets minimum standards of animal care and use.

Lou Hawthorne, CEO of Genetic Savings and Clone in Sausalito, California, said the company's internal animal-welfare protocols are higher than any that the government employs.

"I find it impossible to imagine that government oversight would constrain our activities," he said. "In that sense we welcome it."

The company began cloning cats last February for owners who were willing to plunk down U.S. $50,000. The price since then has dropped to $32,000.

So far, two kittens have been delivered to paying clients. Three more are expected within the next few months. This year the company also hopes to duplicate dogs.

Health Risks

In a press conference Crystal Miller-Spiegel, senior policy analyst for the AAVS, warned of the health risks involved in cloning. "Scientists widely agree that animal cloning is plagued by high death rates and causes deformities, diseases, and other serious medical conditions," she said. "Even the newer technology being employed, such as chromatin transfer, result in high rates of miscarriage and significant numbers of stillborn animals."

Given that only a small number of cloned cats have been born in recent years, she said, there is no long-term data to demonstrate that they will live average, healthy life spans.

During its own press conference to refute charges made by the AAVS, Genetic Savings and Clone said there have been no miscarriages since it began using chromatin transfer two years ago.

Cloning-related abnormalities have also not been observed, said Phil Damiani, chief scientific officer for Genetic Savings and Clone.

"Everything we've seen where a kitten didn't survive—and our losses are within the normal range of conventional breeding—we've seen in conventional breeding as well," he said.

Death Rate

The death rate in conventional breeding is between 10 and 50 percent. The company would not give an exact percentage for its program because of plans to publish a paper in a scientific journal showing what happened to every fetus it detected by ultrasound.

Another issued raised by opponents is that consumers are being misled. That's because consumers are under the impression that a clone is essentially a carbon copy of the original animal, critics say.

"This is a $50,000 rip off," said David Magnus, director of the Stanford Center for Biomedical Ethics in California. "They are not going to have the same personalities as the animals [that owners] are trying desperately to preserve."

Cloning companies are also exploiting the emotions associated with pet loss, Miller-Spiegel said. They do this by recruiting clinical veterinarians to promote services to clients with terminally ill or recently deceased pets.

Grieving Animal Owners

Hawthorne denied taking advantage of grieving animal owners.

"We bend over backwards to make sure that people are doing this for the right reasons," he said. "We make it clear on our Web site and in our phone interactions what is and is not possible in cloning."

The company does target veterinarians for sales and provides them with training, marketing materials, and rebates on every order.

In two years the company believes all of its business will come from the veterinary profession.

"We are reaching out to veterinarians in a major way," Hawthorne said. "We feel that's the best way to promote our service, but we don't emphasize this is for grieving patients."

Jon Klingborg, president of the California Veterinary Medical Association (CVMA), does not believe the veterinary profession will be a strong advocate of cloning.

He said veterinarians understand that, just because the DNA is identical, it doesn't mean the physical characteristics are going to be identical.

"We're not going to put ourselves in a position where we're going to have to explain to somebody after they've spent $30,000 to $50,000 to clone their cat why it's not the same cat," he said.

While animal-rights activists express fear that cloning will add to the pet overpopulation, Klingborg does not believe it'll have an impact.

He believes very few owners will opt to duplicate their pets.

Next month the CVMA, which has more than 5,000 members, will meet with Californians Against Pet Cloning, a newly formed group led by AAVS.

Afterward, Klingborg said, the association will develop a position on the recently introduced bill to ban cloning in the state.

Don't Miss a Discovery
Sign up our free newsletter. Every two weeks we'll send you our top news by e-mail (see sample).