Would a cloned pet be the same?

Was going to put this in GQ but I figure there’s not yet a factual answer to be had.

There is this cat. His name is Mookie. Among myself and my large group of friends at one point or another over the course of his 14 or so years alive he has lived with almost all of us. He’s a dog in a little cat’s body in every possible way. He is the greatest cat that ever lived. Unfortunately he is an old man and though still quite spry will not live forever. Or could he?

If we were to save some of Mookie’s genetic material and have him cloned, would he still be the greatest cat that ever lived or would he just be a cat that just looked exactly like him?

You’d probably get a cat that looked very similar to Mookie. Beyond that, it’s a crap shoot since a big chunk of development is beyond just genetics.

I figured. Too bad.

This American Life did a story, “If By Chance We Meet Again” about a guy who cloned his “pet” bull. The results were less than satifactory; the original animal was easy going and friendly, the clone almost killed the owner.

I can’t believe someone beat me to that TAL story.

Well, at least I can give a link to it. :slight_smile:

I’ve seen pictures of clones cats and cloned horses. Basically, they inherited the same colors, but the patterns are pretty random.

A large part of a cat’s behaviour is due to its upbringing, firstly by its mother, and then by the humans that it lives with.

Identical twins are essentially clones of each other. The ones I know are quite different from each other.

I think it would be harder to have a cloned pet than to accept that the original is gone for good, and get another pet to fill the void. (Though no other cat will ever fill Mookie’s paw prints, I’m sure!)

I had a cat that I found when she was maybe 4 days old - her ears were still closed she was so young. I hand raised her, and she was my bestest cat for 18 years. Having her PTS when her kidneys were too far gone was one of the hardest things I’ve ever done. Even so, I don’t think I’d want her clone. Katie v.2 could not possibly be the same cat as Katie v.1 - my life is too different, I’m different than I was 18 or 20 years ago. The things that made Katie Katie wouldn’t all be in play the same way.

Seeing Katie but not really having her would be harder on my heart than not seeing her at all.

I wouldn’t want a cloned pet. I just lost a dachshund I’d had for a little over two months, when I let her chase a squirrel in the park and she ran out onto the street, to get struck by a car.

I’d never had a dog, and couldn’t believe how much I’d fallen in love with her in such a short time. It’s altogether different from owning a cat. And it was my fault she was running free to get killed.

If I had a clone of my doggie I’d be denying what happened to her. And if the clone didn’t behave the same as the original I’d be afraid I’d resent it.

No. Identical twins are clones of each other who developed in nearly the exact same circumstances before birth and probably pretty close to the same circumstances after birth.

Without time travel (sticking the clone in the womb with the original, creating identical twins), you really can’t grow a clone in the same circumstances as the genetic donor. The different environments are going to create differences.

So, bottom line, twins are much, much, much more like each other than a clone and the donor would be.

Baker, I am so sorry :frowning: How awful for you.