Seeing Double...or Triple...or More...

Fla. Couple pick up their cloned yellow lab puppy

MIAMI (AP) - A Boca Raton couple got a new dog, and it's just like their old dog. Not just the same breed and gender, but the same DNA. Nina and Edgar Otto picked up their cloned yellow lab puppy at the Miami International Airport Monday night. Lancelot Encore was cloned from the DNA of the Ottos' late dog Lancelot, which died of cancer in January 2008.

Guessing that pet cloning would one day be possible, the Ottos had DNA samples of their dog frozen five years ago.

The Ottos paid $155,000 in a San Francisco biotech firm's dog-cloning auction last July.

BioArts International created Lancelot Encore in South Korea, where he was born 10 weeks ago. The Ottos say he's the first single-birth, commercially cloned puppy in the United States.

Now, I believe that cloning has its place. I want to say that right off the bat. Cloning organs, for example, would be a huge scientific advancement, because someone needing a heart transplant could just get his or her own heart cloned (using a gene knock-out technique to destroy any genetic defects the heart may have), and there would be no risk of his or her body rejecting it. No need for anti-rejection drugs, etc, etc. It is also closely related to stem cell research, so advances in cloning may help in that area, as well, but this nonsense (article above) is just plain wrong!

Let's teach our children that, when a beloved pet dies, it's no big deal! We just a need a bit of Fluffy's DNA and a load of cash, and we'll get to have Fluffy2, an genetic copy of our dead pet. Perfect in every way.

...ahem...of course, there's no saying that there really would be cloning errors as we see in the movie Multiplicity, since a clone is an exact genetic copy, when done correctly. It is exactly the same in each and every way...which is exactly why I'm against the idea of cloning entire organisms.

You see, as someone who once wanted to be a geneticist, I have what probably isn't a unique view of cloning, but it is one that, perhaps, the Average Joe might not think about. The idea behind reproduction is genetic advancement of the species. Cloning is anything but. A clone is an exact copy of the original, making the next generation exactly the same as the one before. There is no genetic improvement, no chance for adaptation, and no true advancement of the species. In 1997, the average annual milk production per cow (in Oklahoma, because that's the only chart I could find that would tell me anything useful) was around 14,000 pounds (that's around 1,647 gallons of milk per cow per year, for those who are curious), by by 2006, that had climbed to almost 17,000 pounds (2,000 gallons). If someone had cloned an average cow in 1997, the calf was born in 1998, and she came into milk in 2000, she would have been producing about 1,000 pounds (~117.6 gallons) less than the average cow of her generation. Of course, they didn't clone an average cow, they cloned a super cow: Aspen, the Holstein who they say produced 35,000 pounds (4,117.6 gallons) annually. I don't know what Amy's milk production turned out to be, but I am not sure that is was the same as Aspen's.

There is, of course, a good reason for full-animal cloning. Not genetically, of course. It makes an ideal way to run experiments on drugs and the like, because the control animal can be genetically identical to the animals used in the experiment, making genetic differences a non-issue when analyzing the outcome of the tests (say, they're testing something that helps an animal live longer, and the not genetically identical control animal dies of natural causes that are actually created by a genetic defect no one knows it has, while the animal on the experimental drug lives almost twice as long. With cloning, that would not happen, and the results of the study can be considered more accurate). They can also be used to see if the clones would all end up just like their original, even if raised in different environments, and to see how those different environments seem to effect the animals. Things like that. Of course this can (and has, as far as i know) been done with mice. It's economically inefficient to use cows, for example, because they can't safely reproduce until 1.5 years of age, where as mice are ready to go in 4-7 weeks (and will only live up to about 3 years, while the average life-span of a cow is 20 or so years, so waiting for a cow to die of old age takes considerably longer, too). The cow and sheep cloning, in my opinion, was more to see if it could be done.

There are other issues with cloning, as well. Rapid aging, for example. Unfortunately, I couldn't gain access to the entire article put up by Dr's Yang and Tian (of UConn), because I don't have a subscription to the web site and am no longer an active student, meaning I can't use UConn's account access the paper (it's here, if anyone with access wants to take a look), but, if I remember correctly, there is some evidence to support the idea that an animal cloned from an adult may suffer from rapid aging.

Basically, I am of the belief that it is too early to tell if cloning Fido is really a good idea. Of course, the other problem with cloning the family pet is the fact that the owners will expect the copy to be exactly like the original, which it won't be if they don't treat it exactly the same as they treated Fido1.

Modern Celebrity + Role Model = FAIL

So, I've had a great admiration for Veronica Lake for quite some time. In fact, I've worn my hair over one eye just like her for a number of years, now. Like, since before I knew exactly who she was. There's just something beautiful about her. To me, she embodies what a woman should be. Don't ask me why. I can't say for sure.

There is one thing about her, and about all of the women who were celebrities in her day, that the celebrities of this day don't have. The actresses of the 1940s were just so glamorous. I mean, Joan Fontaine, Judy Garland, Bette Davis, Lucille Ball, Ingrid Bergman, Vivien Leigh, Veronica Lake...they're all names people still remember. And they remember them as well loved actresses and role models. They were held on a pedestal, but they were allowed to be human, and they acted like real people. I mean, during war time, what did Veronica Lake do with her celebrity status? She didn't attack cars with umbrellas, go crazy, or make a scene. She encouraged women to become involved with the war effort, and told them to wear their hair (which women were wearing in her trade-make "peek-a-boo" style) in a more practical manner to prevent accidents at the factories. Things like that. She lead by example. She was a true role model.



And who do the children of the newer generations have to look up to? Skeletal Paris Hilton, crazy Brittany Spears, strung-out Lindsey Lohan? I'm throwing Taylor Swift out here, too, because she's like 19 and they make her out to look like a 2-bit whore (seriously, in every picture of her out there she's wearing a plunging neckline, too much make up, and her mouth is slightly open and her eyes have this lusty look in them. She's pretty, sure, but a standard head shot is pretty much porn for teens who haven't seen "real" porn before). Honestly, these people who are plastered all over the tabloid magazines don't belong there. I'm generalizing, yes, there are a few out there who are worthy of their celebrity status, but all the press goes to the ones that make the biggest waves, and nothing makes bigger waves than a scandal.

The anthem to my cause:



(I really have no intention of dedicating my blog to this kind of thing, but I felt like it, and it's my blog, after all...)

Let's Get Rich

I just wanted to post a YouTube video of my new favorite song. It's cute! You'll like it!



Something about it just makes me smile. The entire album is great, and part of the proceeds for it goes to Stand Up to Cancer, making it a guilt-free purchase for those like me, who have more important things to spend what little money they have on (like car payments, insurance and student loans). I encourage everyone who likes her music to buy this album, and if you don't know if you like her stuff or not, but enjoyed this one, check out the others she has on YouTube. She is quite a talented musician.

Now, speaking of getting rich, and spending money on charitable causes...

The other day, one of my co-workers and I were talking about what we would do if we had a disgusting amount of money. Of course, this is something I have thought of often, considering the success of writers such as J. K. Rowling and my own desire to become a well loved author, myself. Everyone always talks about some day when they're rich and famous. Well, some day when I'm rich and famous, here's what I'll do:

1. Pay off those student loans. If they're not paid off already, of course. I'm hoping to become a published author in the next few years (after I finish something, or course), so it'll just be a matter of how long it takes me to be a well read author. I'm not expecting myself to be an overnight sensation, but maybe I'll write something Oprah Book Club worthy? You never know, although, I don't think she has any fantasy books on her list.
2. Pay off any other outstanding bills. My truck, for example. Of course, I'm paying her off as my birthday present to me in May, but, I'll have other bills to worry about, too, so this will still apply.
3. Find myself a place. I am unlike most women my age. I do not have my entire wedding planned out. I have my perfect house thought up. I want an older (Victorian?) style house with a tower, a wrap-around porch, a hipped roof (or something less boring than a normal peeked one, anyway) and a big attic that can become my writing "cave". I'd also like to be able to put radiant heat in the floors, and be able to adapt it to solar energy. A big yard is a must. I don't want to be too close to my neighbors. Seeing them is ok...from a distance. I want space for livestock if I decide I want some. I also want room for a great big herb garden. oh! And a gazebo!
4. Help out the family. Maybe put some solar panels on my folks' house, too. Stuff like that. I figure I owe them. That, and I'd help my brother's kids with books for college. I feel that, paying your own way through school helps you appreciate it more, but a little help in the form of books can't hurt.
   
5. Put some aside. Just in case. What's J. K. Rowling going to do when the Harry Potter craze wears off? What will I do if my own success wanes? A writer depends on his or her fans to live. If he or she can't sell books, he or she can't eat dinner. Putting a bit aside for a rainy day can't hurt.
6. Talk to a financial advisor and set up a budget. Figure out how much excess i'll have once all of my needs are taken care of.
7. Pick a charity...or five. I want to live comfortably. I don't need oodles of money and fancy crap. If I have extra money I don't need, why not donate it to a worthy cause? Stem cell research? Alternative energy? Aid to agriculture? Heifer International? I don't know what. I'd probably put a good chunk into 4-H. Give back a little, you know? Maybe I'll even start a charity. Who knows?

Of course, my co-worker wanted to know what I'd do that was greedy. Everything I've listed above is practical, I think. Pay off debts, buy a place, help the family, ensure my own survival, and get rid of the excess. As far as greedy goes? What would I do that was completely unpractical and 100% greedy? Maybe I'd start treating myself to facials. Or buy a vehicle that runs on hydrogen fuel cells (only when the technology is ready, though. I don't want to be driving an experiment). Something like that. Ooh, and I'd update my wardrobe. That would be nice...

The Return of the Occasional Blogger

So, yes, it has been a while since I've updated. That's what happens when you forget your password...and the password to the email address your account is set up through...and the pseudonym you so cleverly thought up to make the account under, which is also the name for the email address. A vicious circle, really. I will try not to forget again, but I'm not making any promises.

Now, an update: I still haven't finished writing anything, so you will have to wait a bit longer to read one of my inspired master works of fiction. I did get over 50,000 words in the 2008 NaNoWriMo. That was a great month of writing insanity. I enjoyed it completely! In more recent days, I haven't been doing as much, but I have temporarily hit a literary wall, and am, at present, trying to decide if I would be better off scaling it, or bashing through it. Right now, I'm waiting to see if it will fall on it's own. I've had a tickling of inspiration over the last few days, so, maybe...

And, on a side note, as an American citizen, I would like to say a great "Huzzah!" for Obama. Change is good. I am ready.

Songs from the Dead

I ran into a really neat article today about whistles found buried with Aztec remains. They have named them "Whistles of Death" and have a few theories as to what they were used for. They originally thought they were toys, or some ceremonial symbol or decoration, but then, someone blew into one, and it made a very chilling sound. They now believe that human sacrifices would blow into them before their deaths, that they were used to aid the deceased along their journey to the underworld, or perhaps they were used to warn off enemies. Some even believe that certain ones were used to lull people into a dream state to aid in healing certain illnesses. Apparently the Aztecs are known to have used conch shell horns at the start of ceremonies and in war to communicate strategies, and they are also believed to have used a type of horn as a deer-lore (like a bird-call for deer, I would imagine).

I think it's all really cool, the way they used sound (maybe even a good thing to file away for future creative use in my writings), but the COOLEST thing is this: A researcher named Roberto Velazquez has been working to re-create these whistles so we might know what they sound like. I found a video on YouTube of some of the whistles and their corresponding sounds. Some are very bird-like, others are soothings, and others...well, you be the judge:



And, while I'm at it, I found the article here, for those who may want to read it.

The Truth is Out There

So, I am totally excited for the new X Files movie that's coming out. It's called The X Files: I Want to Believe. AWESOME, right?! Maybe it's because I was a huge X Files nut when I was a kid, but I'm so very excited! Since it's not coming out until July 25th, I've decided to watch the television series online. I found a website called Sidereel, where all of the seasons and episodes that are posted in 5000 different places across the 'net are gathered in one place for all to see. I'm on number four at the moment (literally. The site this episode is on is slow at buffereing, so I'm typing between segments). It's been great fun. Like looking back to when I would sit on the couch with all the lights off, because you CAN'T watch the X Files with the lights on. I still remember bits and pieces of some of the episodes, and am very tempted to pick up at least one of the X Files books that are at B&N. The crazy thing, though, is that two out of the three episodes I've watched so far have had moments that made me pause...

In Season 1, Episode 2: Deepthroat, Mulder and Scully go to Idaho to investigate the disappearance of a test pilot that no one else in the bureau will pay a mind to. Mulder is sure that the military is testing planes with UFO-based technology, so, basically, the U.S. Military has UFOs. When he talks to a pair of teenagers who like to sneak into the airbase and watch the light show (and get stoned), Mulder asks the boy what he thinks these things are. The kid replies that, while he doesn't think that it's really a UFO, he's pretty sure that it's some top-secret new airplane that they're going to use in "Gulf War II" in order to "drop bombs on Sadam's house." Now, I don't know about UFOs, but "Gulf War II?" This war that's going on now isn't quite that, but we went after Sadam's house, too. I wouldn't call it foresight, just irony, I guess, watching this now during a war that could almost be "Gulf War II."

The pause I had in Season 1, Episode 3: Squeeze wasn't as long, because the incident itself was only mentioned briefly, but Scully is talking to one of her colleagues, someone she graduated from the academy with, over coffee, and comments on his work at catching the guy behind the World Trade Center bombing (which occurred on February 26, 1993).

I wonder what kind of things we take for granted now that people will look back on one day and think "Wow."

Thoughts on Writing

I've been hesitant with my writing of late. Worried that I'll never really succeed. Not so sure that people will want to read it. It's had me out of sorts. Wanting so badly to just bleed the words onto plain white paper, but afraid that no one will appreciate the part of myself that I pour into it. It's frightening, when all you really want to do is write, and you start to think that maybe you can't. Truth be told, I've never finished a piece. Well, not a novel, anyway. I have a small handful of short stories that I've done, but the goal is to finish a novel. The dream is to find my books at B&N between Elizabeth Haydon and Robin Hobb, or, even better, to NOT find them there because they're sold out again. Somewhere along the line, however, a splinter of doubt worked its way under my skin, and now I'm afraid it's in too deep to pull it out. I need literary Ichthammol, something that will draw the doubt back out. It's really starting to irritate.

I read a very useful article in Writer's Digest today. It's in the August 2008 edition.The "Writer's Workbook" section on fiction talks about how much information to reveal when. The guy has a point. I tend to want to hold things back in hopes that it will add a little intrigue and keep people reading. Also, as he points out in the article as one of the reasons writers withhold info: I don't really know what's going on right away. I write until it falls into place. I don't follow an outline. the words really do just come to me and I write them down. The bleeding onto paper is an appropriate analogy, because it really does work that way. I get a spark of inspiration (a "cut"), I write until it is expended, and then the ideas kind of...clot. It's not really something I have control over. I can't even imagine writing to fit an outline. It would be too limiting. Like putting a band aid on my inspiration. But, anyway I'm getting off topic. The idea is the fact that I tend to hold things back without even thinking about it. The article suggests that the reader should know/be aware of the things the MC knows/is aware of. I've heard whispers of this in the past, but no one has ever put it right out there and said: "HELLO! You don't want to hold too much back, or you'll confuse or in some other way lose your readers!"

They also suggest summarizing the entire story into one sentence. WOW! I've heard of this, too, but it's HARD! One sentence, no big deal, right? Take your favorite book, and summarize it. One sentence. "A frustrated character does not want to try green eggs and ham because they seem strange, but when convinced, realizes it is better than expected." Well, I'm not very good at it, and that's not my favorite book It's just the first one that came to mind. Try it on a novel. Try it on one you've written. Summarize a piece of your soul into one sentence. Not easy at all!

I've never had a problem with providing background. In fact, my main issue with it is the fact that I tend to want to do a prequel, because I've come up with so much background that I can't work into the original story. I do, however, like to add a bit of mystery to my MC by holding some things back. While I realize that this CAN be done (most of my favorite books actually do this), you have to give a little taste to keep people coming back for more. In Wizard's First Rule, Goodkind doesn't tell us certain information about Kahlan Amnell until Richard finds out about it himself, but we know there's SOMETHING that she isn't telling us about herself. In the Wayfarer Redemption trilogy by Sara Douglass, we learn about Axis's past with him. I guess the idea should be to withhold information not to keep the readers guessing, but to keep the MC guessing.

I'll have to make a note of that to myself. Add it to my collection of things I've learned. I've also read (probably in Writer's Digest), that a good writer keeps learning and evolving as he or she goes. He or she shouldn't stay in one place because it worked the first time. Think outside the box, learn, and move constantly forward. Writers who don't do this end up stagnating, and so do their books. There is a ton of books on the shelves at B&N that were awesome best sellers, but turn into the only books a writer ever is successful with because he or she thinks the same thing will work again the second time. For me, this is good in a way, since my style is constantly evolving. The only problem: I evolve too fast, so by the time I draw near the end, the beginning seems...less. There in lies the larges bit of doubt.

I feel as though I need my own Inklings, like Lewis and Tolkien and their little group. A soundboard of other writers who relate to my frustrations and concerns. People who will listen to my writing and give me honest, useful feedback. I don't know too many writers, and they're all either too far away, or they write a different genre and don't really appreciate mine. Still, it would be great. To get together with a group of close friends once a week or so, read our manuscripts to one another, and learn together to improve our craft. I just can't bring myself to do it with people I don't know. Perhaps I'll see if there's a way to read my own writing to my Mac and play it back to at least have myself as a soundboard. I just don't usually pay attention to people speaking/reading aloud. Maybe I should sing my novels to myself...