Earlier this month, the Institute of Neuroscience in the Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS) celebrated a monkey named Retro as the first clone of the rhesus monkey species to officially survive to adulthood.

Animal cloning has been around for decades, with the first successful cloning of a mammal (a sheep named Dolly) in 1996. Since then, scientists have expanded their technology capabilities to successfully clone over 20 species of animals, including cattle, mice, pigs, goats, rabbits, camels, horses, cats, dogs, and monkeys. The birth of Retro in 2020 was particularly significant because rhesus monkeys’ genes are 93% similar to humans’, making them extremely useful test subjects for human-grade medical and physiological experiments. But at what cost? 

Publicized media tends to focus on only the animals that survive successful experiments. Meanwhile, there is a much darker side to the industry that isn’t given the same attention: the pain, deaths, and sacrifices it requires on animals’ part. In order to create a clone of a species, scientists first administer dozens of hormone injections to donor females to increase production of egg cells, which are extracted through an invasive surgery. The eggs are fused with the DNA to be cloned, then implanted directly into the uterus of another female subject who will carry the embryo all the way to childbirth. The surrogate mother must then endure the (very likely) possibility of either a miscarriage or giving birth via cesarean section, and afterwards, the distress of being separated from her offspring. Either way, surrogates are often forced to later carry more cloned pregnancies. 

Before the success of Retro, researchers went through 294 embryos and 49 surrogate monkeys — six of which suffered miscarriages during early pregnancy. In total, only one live birth came out of the experiment, but the baby monkey died after 12 hours. Since then, the CAS team has undertaken hundreds more failed cloning attempts. Evidently, it’s a heavily inefficient process that is difficult to justify, given the countless number of healthy monkeys that are subsequently put at risk. Moreover, it's important to consider the resulting livelihoods of these cloned animals. If the mere 3.5-year mark of Retro’s survival was enough cause for celebration, we need to rethink whether the ends truly justify the means. Perhaps to some people, the cloning industry still holds merit as long as it benefits human health. However, the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (RSPCA) finds that the animal suffering caused during cloning outweighs any immediate benefit to human patients.

Recently, beyond medical research and development, animal cloning technology has been pushing more and more into the pet industry. Several biotech companies in the US (ViaGen Pets & Equine), China (SinoGene), and South Korea (Sooam Biotech and KrioAsia) already offer commercial pet cloning services for dogs, cats, and horses. One of KrioAsia’s recent customers, a YouTube influencer by the channel name “Tico the Samoyed,” introduced her two new puppies this year, revealing that they were cloned from her deceased dog Tico. While some of her followers empathized with this unique way of overcoming the loss of a lifetime companion, others expressed criticisms questioning the ethics behind pet cloning, with animal welfare groups chiming in. 

As expected, the process of cloning pets is just as inefficient as that of the monkeys at CAS, with donor dogs typically being cut open for their egg cells and surrogate mothers delivering via C-section. Take the first successful dog cloning project, conducted by South Korean researchers in 2005. It used 319 egg donors, 214 surrogate mothers, and 3,656 embryos, but resulted in only 5 cloned dogs and 11 cloned cats. Despite the technological advancements occurring in the 20 years that have passed since then, the success rate of dog cloning remains a low 20%. 

Indeed, the loss of a pet is devastating, and cloning companies are clearly capitalizing on this opportunity to provide owners with a coping strategy. However, attempting to ease this temporary emotional pain via permanent damage and countless deaths is not the answer. Besides, even if a pet is successfully cloned, only its appearance is replicated, not its personality or memories. Furthermore, this also adds to the growing number of homeless animals in shelters and takes away the chance to be adopted from pets that actually need a home. Thus, while pet cloning technically remains a personal choice, it’s important that pet owners consider such factors involved.

With a worldwide lack of regulations regarding animal cloning, the risk of animal abuse remains a frightening reality, and legal provisions must be put in place for the management and supervision of this process. Unlike scientific research for medical purposes, pet cloning companies operate for profit and should definitely not be allowed to bypass animal abuse regulations. But since animals cannot speak for themselves in the face of the law, nothing will happen unless humans advocate for them. Let us remember that animals live, think, and feel, just as we do, and that their rights also deserve as much of a place in legislative discussions.