Yesterday on the radio, on the drive home from work, I heard of a company that manufactures a small ID device, the size of a grain of rice, which keeps information on where you are and your medical records. A 'low jack' for humans, as it were. Several people have already received it and are being tested to see how effective it is. The device has already been used successfully by implantation on animals feared to being stolen. There was even an news story, discounted by the Royal Family of Britain, of one or both of the princes having an implant for tracking purposes, in case of kidnapping.

My question is: why?

Another story is even creepier. ABC Evening News had a story about a genetic lab which was supposed to be experimenting with cloning pets. They showed a kitten which had been cloned, and was supposed to have displayed characteristics of its "parent". The company explanation of why their service was needed was to alleviate having to suffer the loss of a cherished pet. Heck, just have them cloned and enjoy their company all over again. Reportedly, dogs were not able to be cloned yet, because the process was still to difficult.

When are we going to start cloning parents / siblings / children when an early death ensues and a clone of that person is deemed justified? Am I being paranoid? Your comments, favorable or unfavorable, please. I'm not trying to cause any hard feelings, just looking for an honest discussion on the topics mentioned above.

-- j.r. guerra in s. tx. (jrguerra@boultinghousesimpson. com), February 15, 2002

Answers

I saw the cloning thing on the morning talk show. They were talking to the guy who apparently headed all this up, and he was already talking cost of duplication! He was asked how they were funded, and said it was by a clinic they had for spaying and neutering animals.

When asked wasn't this cloning contributing to the pet population problem, he actually said that it alleviated the problem because by spaying and neutering, there would be fewer animals. He said "it's complicated to understand", but it actually was better in the long run to clone.

Yeah, better for him!! Spay and neuter all your pets, and you have no choice but to clone them, they can't reproduce on their own! Plus, he gets you coming and going - spay your pet at my clinic, and then let me clone it for you in a few years when it gets old!

As for paranoid, I don't think so. I am amazed what they come up with in the name of "progress" any more. I hope I haven't stepped on too many toes, but cloning an animal is also limiting your experiences. Kind of like having chocolate pudding for dessert every day of your entire life. You are losing out on the experience of loving something else, and being loved in a different way by a different animal.

Am I making any sense? Sometimes my brain gets ahead of my fingers!

-- Christine in OK (cljford@mmcable.com), February 15, 2002.

It scared me silly some of the things that are being done in the name of "progress". Granted, I believe that things such as medication, surgical procedures, etc., are all good -- they alleviate suffering or cure serious illness. However, is the loss of a pet not a natural part of life? Did anyone ask Fluffy if she wanted to be brought back again?

I think the further away from faith we move, the more we try to compensate for the lack of a higher being be striving to BE that higher being. It bothers me that LIFE has been replaced by SCIENCE. What is that going to tell our children? Anything is replacable, including you, and LIFE is cheap, because we can make it anytime we want it. Not to mention the social effect. What if some maniac decides that it would be a good idea to bring Hitler back? How accessible is YOUR DNA?

One of my biggest concerns, and one of the major reasons why "homesteading" (for lack of a better word) is a lifestyle choice we have made is that we are scared silly of the effects of this kind of "science" on the food chain. I don't want to be eating Franken- cattle, or Franken-carrots for that matter, thank you very much. The deteriorating health of our society should be proof enough that "techno-food" isn't food at all.

Science and progress can be a wonderful thing, if money and ego is left out of it.

-- Tracy (trimmer31@hotmail.com), February 15, 2002.

Anyone ever read Pet Semetary?

-- Judi (ddecaro@snet.net), February 15, 2002.

Ooops, sorry bout the running underline

-- Judi (ddecaro@snet.net), February 15, 2002.

To the National I.D. implant thing??? No, no and no, over my dead body kind of no, I'm still P.O.'d about S.S. numbers and D.L. numbers, let alone National I.D. implant things! Shades of 1984 for sure! Nothing good will come because of it, dental records to identify bodies are good enough for me!

Cloning??? For humans it is entirely unethical, mostly because 350 embyros must be destroyed in the process to successfully clone one person, therein lies the ethical problem, at least for me.

Cloning for animals??? Also the ethics thing, but for some people this won't matter, but for me it does, to me all life has insintric value, no matter what. For Pete's sake, I let out those darn, pesky ladybugs that threaten to overtake our house instead of killing them :-)!!!

-- Annie Miller in SE OH (annie@1st.net), February 15, 2002.

Oh, Judi, what horrible flashbacks!! I used to enjoy Stephen King until that movie came out! I generally try to avoid him now! And I wouldn't read the book again, either!

-- Christine in OK (cljford@mmcable.com), February 15, 2002.

I like j.r. because we have the same first two initials.

j.r., it appears to me that the animal cloning is just one more feed to the egotism that doesn't want to give up anything and wants to have everything.

-- Randal at home in Brazil (randal@onebox.com), February 15, 2002.

One more thought on the pet cloning thing. Sure, they can clone the body, but an identical body is not going to make an identical pet. Are identical twins the same person? Neither would a cloned pet be. You can't clone personality, or, I would say, spirit.

-- mary (marylgarcia@aol.com), February 15, 2002.

I think it is only a matter of time before we find out that someone, somewhere in the world has already attempted cloning a human being. I think we are tampering with something that would be best left alone. If you think the Stephen King novel is scary, read "The Boys from Brazil", about boys who were cloned by some of Hitler's scientists, I believe, if I remember it correctly. Scary! Just because we CAN do something doesn't make it right to do it. Seems like I saw a report recently about Dolly, the first sheep cloned, as to how she was showing signs of early aging? Could be we aren't supposed to meddle with things like this. Just my two cents worth. Jan

-- Jan in Co (Janice12@aol.com), February 15, 2002.

Jan, if I remember correctly, I believe I read that a number of cloned animals were having serious problems. Dolly the sheep isn't the only one. I personally don't like the idea at all.

As to the ID implant, I think it's great for animal identification. Except that it will be used to help the gov't keep track of even more of our business than they already do. But they will do that regardless. I don't see it as any different than a brand, tattoo, ear tag or whatever, on an animal. We are in the process now of buying the system so we can identify all our horses (all of which are the same size and color!). It will prevent misidentifying horses, lessen the chances of anyone doing any "paper switching" in the future, and identify an animal if it's stolen. All good things. But used on people? NO! SS numbers and the like are bad enough.

-- Lenette in OR (kigervixen@webtv.net), February 15, 2002.

" I don't see it as any different than a brand, tattoo, ear tag or whatever, on an animal. We are in the process now of buying the system so we can identify all our horses (all of which are the same size and color!). It will prevent misidentifying horses, lessen the chances of anyone doing any "paper switching" in the future, and identify an animal if it's stolen. All good things."

And when they want to find you they can just find your animal. I wouldn't have it in an animal, a plant, a card, a book, a butterfly or any piece of equipment. Lojack for the living?? Never. I wouldn't even have Lojack on a Ferrari...Seems like we are too concerned with convenience and terrified of losing our stuff. They are implanting all animals from the shelters here now. No more rescues for me.

I really mean no disrespect, but I couldn't possibly disagree any more than I do, Lenette.

I won't even address the cloning as you can probably guess what I think.;)

-- Doreen (animalwaitress@yahoo.com), February 16, 2002.

Doreen,

I am probably as "paranoid" as j.r. concerning a lot of this stuff. BUT...to begin with, the horses we are going to implant are not our personal horses, they are a business only. ALL at some point will be sold. (And the buyers will be told the horse has an implant.) Dh is retiring and we are eventually selling out all the horses from our business. None of the horses we keep for personal use will have an implant. Theft is not my major concern. Our horses are so hard to tell apart that there is no way with the number we have (60+), that even we, who have raised them from babies, can always be sure. We consider it a necessity to be certain we are not misidentifying an animal. Anything less would be dishonest, whether intentional or not. And if we have trouble telling them apart, what about people who buy them? I've been in horses a long time, and I always run across people who think nothing of paper switching. It happens all the time with livestock and pets. I will do what I can to prevent it from happening to anything with our name on it. Once the horse leaves our hands, especially if it goes out of state, we have to have some way of ensuring the animal someone claims is one of ours, truly is. This is the main reason we are going with the implant. We will not be having anyone else involved, we will do the implanting ourselves - no gov't agent, not even a vet will set foot on our property.

If the gov't wants to know where all our horses are, fine. The horses are a business, and since we don't cheat on our taxes, I have nothing to hide concerning them. Shoot, with the new scrapie regulations, I can't even sell a goat now without tagging it. Which I don't feel like doing, so will probably not raise any more goats except for personal use.

Given a doomsday scenario (corrupt government seeking to find and control all it's citizens, etc.), I doubt very much I would be trying to hide on horseback, so I don't see the implants on my horses having any effect on me or my family, even if I did decide to implant our riding horses. With the modern equipment our military has for finding people, I don't think they'd have too much trouble locating us, horseback or otherwise, implants or not. Since we're not implanting our personal horses anyway, the whole matter is irrelevant. However, the idea of an implant on a person is just repugnant to me. I think the gov't will probably be able to find and probably identify us if they want to, even without an implant, but I have no intention of allowing them to put one on my person, regardless.

Doreen, I don't mean to argue with you. I actually agree with a whole lot of your thinking, though not all of it. I think the gov't already has way too much control over our lives, and I see it getting a lot worse. I agree with doing everything we can to slow the process down, but in the end, well, you're a Christian, you know the end of the story. We need to fight against what is wrong, but we ARE fighting a losing battle, for the time being. Ultimately our faith has to lie in God, not ourselves.

-- Lenette (kigervixen@webtv.net), February 16, 2002.

One additional comment - The implant we will use in our horses is not a "locater" device. It has no power supply of it's own, the power is generated by a scanner. One has to have a scanner and pass it over the animal to be able to read any information.

-- Lenette in OR (kigervixen@webtv.net), February 16, 2002.

Hey Lenette, you don't have to defend your thinking to me, and I never, ever expect anyone to agree with me on everything....frankly, THAT would be just as frightening as verichipping your baby!

I understand that there are alot of management benefits out of this, but no matter how wonderful it is, I wouldn't do it. And yes...I am soooo glad I know how this ends, and that the Lord Jesus Christ has told us what is coming. Everyone has to make their own decisions.

I never thought your reply was in the least bit argumentative, friend! I have just drawn my line in the sand, and it starts at my feet and extends to the animals entrusted to my care. Yes, if they really were looking for someone, they would be able to find them, even easier if there is a satellite uplink..except for 6'4" Arabians living in Afghanistan, lol.

-- Doreen (animalwaitress@yahoo.com), February 16, 2002.

I notice no one here even mentions the benefits from cloning. Consider the medical advances which can result from the increased availability of stem cells. Work to treat, prevent and eliminate Parkinson's disease and Alzheimer's disease are only two areas which would benefit immensely from this. That's the kind work that will result from cloning long before people worry about cloning a puppy from your ailing ten year old dog.

-- Gary in Indiana (gk6854@aol.com), February 16, 2002.