[뉴사이언티스트] 바이오아츠 Lou Hawthorne 인터뷰 - 그리고 고양이 복제 의뢰자의 불만

[죽순]

[뉴사이언티스트] 바이오아츠 Lou Hawthorne 인터뷰

요것이 지금 보니 재미난 이야기가 많은 기사이군요.

바이오아츠사는 수암의 파트너로 개복제 사업을 하던 회사입니다. 지금은 애완 고양이와 애완견 복제 사업을 접어 버렸지요. 수암은 끈 떨어진 신세가 되어 버렸어요. 얼마 전에는 아예 bioarts.com 웹사이트까지 닫아버렸더군요. 바이오아츠가 개 복제사업을 포기한 6가지 이유를 링크만 하지 않고 아얘 긁어오기를 잘했어요.

이 기사에 실린 재미난 이야기는 차차 하기로 하고 일단 전문을 긁어 왔습니다.

우리나라 기자들도 주는 것 받아적기만 하지 말고 Lou Hawthorne을 인터뷰한 Peter Aldhous처럼 따박따박 중요한 질문들도 좀 하는 맛이 있어야 할텐데...

본 기사도 재미나지만 거기에 덧붙여서 댓글이 또 재미납니다.

바이오아츠사의 전신은 GSC란 회사인데, Julie라는 사람이 5만 달러를 주고 GSC에 고양이 복제를 의뢰했어요. 세계 최초의 고양이 상업용 복제로 기록되었습니다. 고양이 Nicky를 복제하여 Little Nicky를 만들었죠. 언론에 보도되기로는 Julie가 만족했다는 것 같았습니다. 보통 고양이들이 물을 좋아하지 않는 특성을 가지고 있는데, Nicky와 Little Nicky는 물을 좋아하는 특이한 성질까지 닮았다면서리...

그런데 이 기사에 Julie가 댓글을 달았어요. GSC에 대하여 불만을 이야기합니다.

Little Nicky가 Nicky의 복제 고양이임을 증명할 DNA 검사 확인서 같은 것도 왜 안주느냐에서부터 시작하여 Little Nicky의 건강에 문제가 있다는 이야기 등. Nicky는 건강했는데 Little Nicky는 왜 이 모양이냐는 것.

출처 : http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn14249-interview-its-a-dogs-life-again.html?full=true

///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

* 신태영이 세계 최초로 복제한 고양이 CC에 대하여

But in 2002 the Texans did produce Cc, the first cloned cat.

That was a disaster! We had the dubious distinction of having produced the world's first clone that did not resemble its genetic donor. It created an enduring argument that clones will often not resemble their donors even physically - which is false.

Why didn't Cc resemble her genetic donor?

Cc's genetic donor was a female calico cat. These cats have two different cell types for hair colour, in which different copies of the X chromosome have been shut down. If you clone from one cell type, it will give a black and white cat. If you clone from the other cell type, you'll get an orange and white cat. There is no cell that will give you an accurate facsimile of the original. But I'm not aware of this issue in other breeds of cat, and I'm not aware of it in dogs, period.

삼색 얼룩고양이를 복제했는데 2색 얼룩고양이가 된 이유가 재미있네요.

루 호돈의 설명에 의하면 calico cat은 일종의 키메라인 모양입니다. 그래서 어떤 부분의 세포를 핵이식하여 복제하면 흑백 얼룩고양이가 되고, 또 어떤 부분의 세포를 핵이식하여 복제하면 오렌지색과 흰색으로 얼룩진 고양이가 된다는 것. 어떻게 해도 삼색 고양이로는 복제가 안된다는 것.

루 호돈의 설명이 맞는다고 가정할 때 삼색고양이를 복제하는 방법은 삼색고양이의 여기저기 세포를 떼어내어 여러개의 배아를 만든 뒤 이것들을 가지고 여러가지 조합으로 섞어서 키메라를 만들어야 한다는 것. 그러다 보면 삼색 고양이가 나올 수는 있겠네요.

돈을 몇배 더 받아야 할 듯.

p.s.

저 밑에 침묵의 눈님이 CC의 털 색깔에 대한 설명을 해 주셨네요. 그것을 보시기 바랍니다.

* (질문) People won't get the same animal, so is Best Friends Again a misleading title for the auction?

(복제를 의뢰한) 사람들은 똑같은 동물을 얻을 수 없다. 그러므로 'Best Friends Again'이라는 경매 제목은 오도하는 구호가 아닌가?

(답변) We don't say "Best Friends Forever", as if we keep the same animal alive. The word "again" is carefully chosen, because it is a new creature. The friendship can happen again because there's an aesthetic and behavioural connection.

우리는 마치 똑같은 동물을 살려 놓은 것처럼 'Best Friends Forever'라는 말을 하지 않는다. 'again'이라는 단어는 주의깊게 선택된 것이다. 왜냐하면 (복제된 동물은) 새로운 피조물이므로. 우정은 다시 생겨날 수 있을 것이다. 왜냐하면 (처음 동물과 복제된 동물 둘 사이에) 미학적 습성적 연관성이 있으므로.

지극히 인문학적인 대답이로군요. ㅎㅎ

////////////////////////////

Interview: It's a dog's life... again

13:38 03 July 2008 by Peter Aldhous

For similar stories, visit the Genetics Topic Guide

Lou Hawthorne lives with three Missy clones - Mira, Chingu and Sarang (Image: Timothy Archibald)

In 1997, Lou Hawthorne began a quest to clone Missy, his mother's beloved collie-husky cross. Today, this unconventional biotech entrepreneur shares his home with three Missy clones - Mira and her younger sisters, Chingu and Sarang - thanks to a link-up with South Korea's disgraced cloning expert Woo Suk Hwang.

Peter Aldhous visited Hawthorne at his California home as he prepared toauction five dog-cloning opportunities between 5 and 9 July.

How did the project to clone Missy come about?

It was over breakfast in San Francisco. We probably should have laid off the caffeine. Dolly the sheep had just been cloned. There was my mother, my sister, myself and a family friend, John Sperling, who made his fortune in adult education. He paid for the first round of Missyplicity. Otherwise it would have just been a crazy discussion.

Still, few people would entertain the idea, even if they had the money.

There was just something special about Missy. It is very much a spark that lives within Mira and her sisters. People would just stop on the street and have to touch her. She was very smart. My family appreciates intelligence, but also strong will. Missy fit right in.

In 2002, you said that Missy was an anonymous donor's "ageing mutt". Why the initial secrecy?

John and mom have traded places over who was less comfortable with the whole topic. So the ownership of the dog switched back and forth, officially. But at all times Missy was my mom's dog.

Tell us about the initial attempts to clone Missy at Texas A&M University.

They were the ones who broke it down into the three key aspects, which are: obtaining quality ova, embryo production, and performing embryo transfer. With their help, I came to understand that the first and last are the hardest. This is also when I learned that two hours over a pitcher of beer with a top scientist is the equivalent of a semester in their class.

They did produce a stillbirth, which was not widely reported. We felt at the time - it was around 2000 - that it was the penultimate stage before success. But it turned out to be the only definite pregnancy they ever produced.

Why did it prove so difficult?

I think because the quantity of animals was too low. They never had more that 80 dogs at a time. When the Koreans finally succeeded, they had about 5000 dogs.

But in 2002 the Texans did produce Cc, the first cloned cat.

That was a disaster! We had the dubious distinction of having produced the world's first clone that did not resemble its genetic donor. It created an enduring argument that clones will often not resemble their donors even physically - which is false.

Why didn't Cc resemble her genetic donor?

Cc's genetic donor was a female calico cat. These cats have two different cell types for hair colour, in which different copies of the X chromosome have been shut down. If you clone from one cell type, it will give a black and white cat. If you clone from the other cell type, you'll get an orange and white cat. There is no cell that will give you an accurate facsimile of the original. But I'm not aware of this issue in other breeds of cat, and I'm not aware of it in dogs, period.

So does Mira, now lying on my feet, resemble Missy?

This is the age Missy was when we got her. And this is what she looked like.

Why didn't you renew the contract with Texas A&M?

Although the individual scientists were very smart, I didn't feel that the programme was particularly well organised.

So the action switched to your company, Genetic Savings and Clone.

As soon as we cut off funding, they pretty much stopped returning our calls. So we decided we would just hire a really great scientific team and recreate what we had lost. At GSC, rather than building a colony of dogs, we put together a network of breeders. That was similar to what the Koreans subsequently did. The one technique we didn't have was the ability to calculate oestrus timing as precisely as they did.

Why did GSC eventually have to close down?

By 2006, money was tight. John Sperling had to make some very hard choices. We had cloned seven cats, four for paying clients. It was reported that we closed due to lack of interest. In fact, I was signing refund cheques to clients who had paid $32,000. It was not lack of demand. But we were losing money with every order.

After nearly 10 years, you still hadn't cloned a dog. Did you consider giving up?

I like very difficult problems, and this is a really difficult problem. And I'm very happy that the Koreans solved it.

The Korean researchers cloned the first dog in 2005, before you shut down.

We had proven that it could be done, with the stillbirth. We had shown what the biggest hurdles were. But that wouldn't have been enough for most teams in the world. Dr Hwang is one of the most disciplined scientists I have ever met. Last summer, I watched his team retrieve 33 perfect ova and they made 32 embryos. That was about how many we had throughout our project. Dr Hwang did that in one day.

Hwang has been very much involved in your comeback. Tell us about that.

I raised money for a new company called BioArts International. We are building facilities in China. Then I thought: what can we do in the short term? One of our scientists, Taeyoung Shin, who got his PhD under Dr Hwang, said: "Why don't we go and talk to him?"

Hwang's team cloned Missy, and will clone dogs for the winners of your auction. How do you justify working with a disgraced fraudster, who faked his results on human stem cells?

I wouldn't dream of excusing what he did in the past. But for our customers, it makes sense to work with the best in the field of dog cloning.

Have you talked to Hwang about his downfall?

He's devastated, and extremely contrite. He knows he's going to spend the rest of his life being doubted, but he's going to put up with that because he wants to do science. He's got money behind him, and a lab at the Sooam Biotech Research Foundation, south of Seoul.

Are you convinced his contrition is genuine?

At some point, this comes down to one's belief in redemption. When I realised that he was the best person to partner with, I thought: "Goddam it, of all the troubles I've had, now I have a solution, and it involves the pariah of modern science!" But he hasn't lied to me, to my knowledge. If he was a habitual liar now, in my due diligence, I'd have probably come across that.

How will you convince customers that the dog clones aren't fakes?

We've set up systems for verifying everything. Missy's DNA was sent directly to the veterinary genetics lab at the University of California at Davis. Then we took all three of the clones up there. They have the same markers as Missy for the nuclear DNA, but divergent mitochondrial DNA, which proves they are clones.

How much interest has there been in the auction?

At the rate people are coming online, I think there will be about three dozen serious bidders. There is a minimum bid for each auction, starting at $100,000 for the first.

People won't get the same animal, so is Best Friends Again a misleading title for the auction?

We don't say "Best Friends Forever", as if we keep the same animal alive. The word "again" is carefully chosen, because it is a new creature. The friendship can happen again because there's an aesthetic and behavioural connection.

Mira and her sisters are living with you. Why not with your mother?

Because they are three-quarters Border collie, and that's a lot of dog to handle. My mom is in her 80s, and just too old. She's got a fat, slow-moving dog. We have three more Missy clones on the way. Three are going to stay with the family, and three will go to close friends.

Your website says that you "may or may not" clone further pets after the auction. What are your plans?

This time around, I'm not going to over-commit. If this is not profitable, I'm going to be quite comfortable walking away - especially because we have already cloned Missy.

Lou Hawthorne is an English graduate from Princeton University who worked in video production and software design before launching the Missyplicity Project, the world's first large-scale dog and cat cloning research project. Today, he is CEO of the biotech company BioArts International, which is offering opportunities to clone dogs in a venture called Best Friends Again. He lives in Mill Valley, California.

Genetics - Keep up with the pace in our continually updated special report.

//////////////////////////

여기서부터는 댓글

고양이 복제 의뢰자의 불만을 읽어 보세요.

인터뷰어 Peter Aldhous
복제의뢰자 Julieandnicky
바이오아츠 대표 Lou Hawthorne

------------------------

Identical Clones?
Thu Jul 03 14:26:09 BST 2008 by Jamie

"It created an enduring argument that clones will often not resemble their donors even physically â?#147; which is false."

But only a few weeks ago NS had a story about how even identical twins could be genetically different. And very few things are 100% determined by the genome.

------------------------

Identical Clones?
Thu Jul 03 15:01:30 BST 2008 by Christopher A Wininger

Resemble is a relative term. I don't necessarily think Hawthorne was trying to be misleading in his above statement, but I do share the sentiments posted by Jamie. There is a lot more to our appearance than DNA. I do not have the citations but I have seen numerous studies in New Scientists which have shown how our environment can alter aspects of how we look, and even how our DNA is interpreted by cells. I even read one article recently which suggests that environmental factors such as nutrition can actually switch some genes on and off, so our DNA may not even stay constant after birth. One article I recently reads says that coffee has this property and has been shown to activate certain genes. I would expect that most clones will "resemble" the donor but they will probably in many cases be distinguishable from the donor. Perhaps these clone studies will help us further tease apart some of the many factors affecting our development.

------------------------

Identical Clones?
Fri Jul 04 20:34:08 BST 2008 by Lou Hawthorne

The issue is not whether DNA can change slightly over time, nor whether "epigenetic" factors can affect the downstream impact of genetic code. These observations are correct. HOWEVER, these are subtleties; the overwhelming factor of influence on both appearance and behavior in animals is the original genetic code. It would be silly to suggest that identical human twins do not resemble each other very strongly, yet for some reason some people assume it is reasonable to suggest the same thing for clones - despite the fat that they have identical nuclear DNA, just like twins. If you know what to look for, you can tell Missy's clones apart, just a mother of identical human twins can usually tell them apart. But it's not easy and it's getting harder as the Missy clones move into young adulthood - meaning we can no longer distinguish them by size. To suggest that clones simply "resemble" each other and their donor - like strangers on a train who happen to look somewhat alike - is to grossly understate the level of resemblance that commonly occurs between clones and their donors.

Regarding behavioral similarities between them, this is a much more subjective point, but it's widely accepted that genes control behavior in animals to at least some degree. In fact, behavioral traits are commonly manipulated by skilled breeders of both pet and livestock species (one has only to consider the consistent behavioral differences between various breeds of dogs to understand this point.)

------------------------

Thanks Man
Thu Jul 03 18:18:28 BST 2008 by Alex

This article just reminded me that I haven't hit the gravity bong in about an hour..!

------------------------

Gsc
Thu Jul 03 23:31:29 BST 2008 by Julieandnicky

My cat, Nicky, was supposedly cloned

by GSC. To this day, he has not

produced documentation that Nicky

is actually a clone. This Nicky has

a medical condition that the first Nicky never

did. GSC has never followed up on Nicky's

health (even after stating this in a biotech

debate.)

I have noticed that Mr. Hawthorne never

mentions the cats he cloned at GSC.

Are they healthy, has his company followed them for possible cloning related medical issues?

There has not been one follow up from the scientist that supposedly cloned Nicky. All in

all, GSC was a huge disappointment.

------------------------

Gsc
Fri Jul 04 07:45:20 BST 2008 by Peter Aldhous

Julie -

I'd be very interest to learn more, and to put the points you raise to Lou Hawthorne. You can reach me at peter dot aldhous at newscientist dot com, or by using the "contact us" link on the story.

Best wishes,

Peter Aldhous

------------------------

Gsc
Fri Jul 04 20:08:14 BST 2008 by Lou Hawthorne

All of the cat clones we produced at GSC are, to my knowledge, healthy. GSC doesn't formally follow up on the health of the clones it produced because it doesn't exist any more. However, I do track them informally - and again, they are all healthy as far as I know. Of the 7 we produced, I know the whereabouts and well-being of 3 (not counting Little Nicky). Two of our internal clones were adopted by a former employee and the email address I have for her no longer works.

Regarding Little Nicky's health, I'd be interested in learning more. I suspect that if Little Nicky has any health issue, it's an acquired one, not a genetic one.

Regarding the claims of Nicky's owner that she never received any certification that Little Nicky was a clone, this was her choice. It's true that we neglected to provide the certification at the time we delivered Little Nicky to the owner at our Christmas party in 2005 - an unfortunate oversight due to the excitement and busyness of that period. However, after Little Nicky was delivered - to an overjoyed client, by the way - our ability to certify the clone depended on the owner's willingness to provide a DNA sample (all we had on file was DNA from the original Nicky).

After Little Nicky's owner raised the issue, we offered to provide DNA certification of Little Nicky at no cost to her, provided she would arrange for a mouth swab of the clone by her veterinarian. Rather than accepting our offer though, she sent us email after email complaining about our company and our staff. This exchange went on for over a year and involved several hundred emails and phone calls total. Literally DOZENS of times, we offered to arrange DNA certification for Little Nicky - as made other gestures of contrition as well, including free gene-banking for life for the original Nicky. Even after GSC shut down and I formed BioArts, I continued to offer to arrange certification of Little Nicky's status as a clone. (I have submitted samples of the above offers to the author of this article, minus the identity of Little Nicky's owner). Little Nicky's owner gave various reasons for declining our many offers of genetic certification, but to claim now that we never provided such certification is disingenuous at best.

For the record, I will make the offer again, publicly: BioArts will pay for the certification of Little Nicky's status as a clone, using the VGL laboratory at UC Davis, which is generally regarded as among the top animal genomics labs in the world, and has no commercial or personal connection to our company whatsoever. If Little Nicky's owner does not wish to accept this offer, then I think it's time she stopped disparaging GSC and BioArts in various blogs using various identities.

By the way, I do learn from my mistakes, which is why all clones we produce now are independently certified by the VGL laboratory. Anyone who wishes can review VGL's certification of the clones of Missy at the following

URL: http://www.bestfriendsagain.com/media/documents.html

Sincerely,

Lou Hawthorne, CEO

BioArts International

------------------------

Gsc
Sat Jul 12 06:39:52 BST 2008 by Julieandnicky

Mr. Hawthorne,

Your version of what transpired is quite an interesting tale. Might I remind you, it was you that went in front of the national media and proclaimed Nicky was a clone. Certainly you must have the test results to back up your claim?

When I wasn't provided with the results, I asked

for ANY information that could prove Nicky was

a clone. To this day, I have never received

any data/test results/information.

Might I also remind you that I contacted the

DA's office in Marin County and requested that

GSC take part in voluntary mediation to settle this and you refused. Might, I also remind you about the 6 page document (from my attorney) requesting specific information?

I find it quite amazing that somehow the

facts have flipped and I am somehow at

fault.

For $50,000, Genetic Savings and Clone

certainly should have provided us with documentation that Nicky is indeed a clone.

I also believe most people believe these cats

are being followed for any cloning related

issues. They are not. Quite sadly, Nicky

is not a healthy cat. You have absolutely

no knowledge of Nicky's health issues, so I don't

know how you can possible say his

health issues are acquired and not genetic.

Lastly, I do not blog, I don't have enough

time in a day after taking care of a sick kitty.

------------------------

Gsc
Sat Jul 12 06:43:15 BST 2008 by Julieandnicky

The double spacing in the

above comment is a formatting

issue.

------------------------

Cloning Must Continue
Fri Jul 04 02:29:10 BST 2008 by Scott S.

This is science and it will expand knowledge. It is NOT going to lead to more dogs being abandoned, a terrible tragedy for sure. However, people are not going to be paying $100,000 for hundreds of dogs. It's just seed money to learn more with each success.

------------------------

Cloning Must Continue
Fri Jul 04 05:04:11 BST 2008 by K. donald

The whole purpose is expanding science for the greater good. Nobody knows what good and bad can come from it. But one thing you can be sure of is that no one can stop it. No matter how many laws and barriers appear science will be explored and taken to new measures. Whether it is for good or evil you cannot stop the progression of science, history proves that. The thing we have to ask ourselves is; if the cloning of animals becomes a commercial industry then will we support the research of cloning humans. If there are defects in cloned animals then is it a mistake or for the greater good to help improve the process and success rate of the cloning animals. And in realizing this how will it affect our views on the cloning of humans. Is having defects in cloned humans cruel or for the greater good. Imagine for a second what we could do if we could clone everyone that was killed on 9/11. Everyone dies and then the next day they know what happened. Obviously there are many religious and ethical views I am skipping over but I believe and i think all people that hold those views agree that it is up to those people that were killed if they wanted to be cloned. If the technology was available they should be able to have a second chance.

------------------------

Cloning Must Continue
Fri Jul 04 20:44:58 BST 2008 by Lou Hawthorne

The specter of human cloning, upon close examination, is like weapons of mass destruction in Iraq: people (especially media) get very worked up about it, but ultimately there is nothing there. In the decade that I've been involved with animal cloning, I have received thousands of requests to clone various animals. But I've only received 1 or 2 serious requests to clone a person. I don't think there is any real demand for human cloning and thus I don't think anyone will spend the money to do the serious research required to make it happen.

Also, let's be clear that there is no continuity of consciousness between genetic donors and clones. For instance, Missy's clones - although they look and act very much like Missy - had to be housebroken. If they had Missy's memories, why would they have forgotten such a basic social rule? Nor is there any logical or scientific explanation for how such a continuity of consciousness could occur. Therefore, cloning the 9/11 dead would not represent a "second chance" for those who had died, but rather would be the creation of completely new beings who simply have the same genetic code as those who died.

It probably goes without saying but I'll say it anyway: BioArts International has no involvement with human reproductive cloning and does not condone or support such research in any way.

------------------------

Cloned Dogs
Sun Jul 06 02:08:45 BST 2008 by Rosemary

If these are clones - how come their ears are different?

What a waste of time and money this all is - there are so many unwanted animals looking for homes and it is so selfish and disrespectful to try to just replace an animal with a new version of itself. All life is unique and irreplaceable.

------------------------

Pmsl
Mon Jul 07 13:55:25 BST 2008 by Jamie

Haha....as if he got 3 xD

//////////////////////////

[Mr.kim]

황우석한테 Peter Aldhous처럼 따박따박 질문했다가는
들이밀은 마이크 박살날수 있다눈~

[Mr.kim]

Peter Aldhous의 질문과 Lou Hawthorne의 답변 중
부분 부분 골라서 해석 좀 해주시지여~

[죽순]

돈 주고 복제한 애완동물이 4-5년 뒤에 갑자기 죽었다. 이런 경우 제조사 책임이냐? 사용자 책임이냐? 이거 입증하기도 골치 아프겠는데요.

원인을 알기 어려운 경우도 있겠고, 바이러스 감염 따위로 죽었다 하더라도 체세포를 제공한 동물과는 달리 복제된 동물이 면역력이 떨어져서 그럴 수도 있는 것이거든요.

보증기간 같은 것은 있나? 5년 이내에 죽으면 다시 복제해 준다든지...

[죽순]

5만 달러를 주고 복제 의뢰한 Little Nicky 주인 Julie와 Lou Hawthorne 사이에 감정 섞인 공방이 있었습니다.

루 호돈이 블로그 같은 데에서 GSC나 바이오아츠를 비난하는 글을 쓰지 말라고 하니까 Julie가 받아치기를

"아픈 Nicky 돌봐주다 보면 블로그질 할 시간도 없더라."

5만달러를 주고 애물단지를 얻은 것인가?

그 뒤 어찌 처리되었는지는 검색해 보아도 안 나오네요.

[엇중모리] 그 뒤야~ 뉘 알~리오 더~질 더~질

[Mr.kim]

"아픈 Nicky 돌봐주다 보면 블로그질 할 시간도 없더라."

ㅎㅎㅎ