It Takes Three Dogs to Make a Clone

The question posed in the headline is straightforward enough: "Would you clone your dog?" Arriving at an answer, however, is far less straightforward. In the New Yorker, scientist Alexandra Horowitz explores not just the logistics of the cloning process but the bigger-picture questions involved. In the US, ViaGen is the only company that clones dogs, which it does through a patented process that runs customers about $50,000. It promises "a genetic twin of your dog, born at a later date," and while the Texas company delivers on that, Horowitz writes that the pitch "dodges a host of complicated ethical and identity issues." For example, are bereaved pet owners being exploited? Is their grief being monetized? And then there's "an existential issue: who, exactly, is produced when a dog is cloned?"

One part of the process that may come as a surprise is that "for each special, beloved dog that is cloned, two non-special, nameless dogs must be operated on, giving up their eggs or womb," writes Horowitz. (One is a surrogate.) A veterinarian and bioethicist describes this as the "ick factor" for many potential customers, and not much is known about these other two dogs, including the conditions in which they live. Another bioethicist quoted is damning about the whole process: "Cloning to me is black-and-white. I just don't see any countervailing benefit. It seems frivolous and wasteful and ethically obnoxious." To be clear, the story includes interviews with customers who have paid for the cloning and are happy with their new pets (though, yes, there are "numerous" differences with the original), as well as a ViaGen scientist and its president. The full story is a thoughtful read. (Check out other longform recaps.)