This entry was posted on Sunday, June 8th, 2008 at 6:21pm and is filed under Media and information, Health, Food Production. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
Just because you’re a scientist doesn’t mean everything you say is true or makes sense. Take the following quote, which has appeared in numerous recent stories about the advent of commercially available dog cloning.
A cloned dog is “likely to be a totally unknown dog, just as if you went to the pound and adopted another unknown animal”, says Dr Robert Lanza, chief scientific officer at the Massachusetts biotech company Advanced Cell Technology. “If anyone thinks they’re going to get Fluffy back, they’re gravely mistaken.”
Excuse me, isn’t the genetic basis of behavior, size, hair coat, temperament, and many other traits the reason we have different dog breeds in the first place? Sure, just like identical twins are still individuals, a clone (which is similarly a genetic duplicate of the genetic donor) will not be the same animal as the original. But, given that genetics are a huge part of what determines an animal’s characteristics, a clone will be as similar as you can get. Given the laws of genetics for most traits, a clone will be more like the original than even a littermate.
It’s hard enough trying to set straight misinformation perpetuated by reporters and others who may not have the training to know better. Shame on Dr. Lanza (who’s company has had a major stake in this technology) for perpetuating something both idiotic and untrue, when he knows better (or at least ought to).
June 9th, 2008 at 11:43am
I stopped trusting scientists a long time ago.
Part of the problem is, that so many studies are funded by interested parties.
June 10th, 2008 at 6:00am
Objectivity is certainly a big factor in deciding who to trust. Who DO you trust for your information?
This is a serious question for me as I try to sort out ‘the truth’ about issues. Activist groups are certainly not objective, The press is often more interested in making something seem exciting, and reporters don’t have the background to be accurate, quite often. I trust my friends, but again, they don’t always have their facts straight.
June 10th, 2008 at 11:02am
I completely agree. It is always important to check and make sure that the “scientist” that you’re listening to is legit. It is so easy to dress someone up in a white coat, call him “Dr.” and convince the masses that he knows what he is talking about.