Slashdot Mirror


Dentist Wants To Clone John Lennon Using DNA Extracted From Lennon's Tooth

dryriver writes "People fantasizing about a Beatles comeback tour might yet see their dream come true, all thanks to Dr. Michael Zuk. This dentist is the proud owner of one of John Lennon's teeth, and hopes to use it to clone the musician. By the looks of it, Dr. Michael Zuk came in possession of the tooth in 2011. At that time, he purchased the molar at an auction organized in the United Kingdom, and paid about $30,000 (€22,424) for it. According to The Inquisitr, the dentist is now working alongside scientists in the United States, who are helping him figure out a way to extract DNA from the tooth without damaging it in the process. This DNA would serve to bring back John Lennon. Apparently, Dr. Michael Zuk hopes that his project will snowball into a scientific and pop-cultural revolution. 'To potentially say I had a small part in bringing back one of Rock's greatest stars would be mind-blowing. I am nervous and excited at the possibility that we will be able to fully sequence John Lennon's DNA, very soon I hope,' the dentist reportedly commented on the importance of his work."

4 of 224 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Fantasists by Blaskowicz · · Score: 4, Interesting

    He also won't have the same finger prints and iris patterns and some other things like spots on the skin and I don't know what.

  2. Ethics of cloning by SirGarlon · · Score: 3, Interesting

    At first I thought cloning a human at would be extremely cruel because of what happened to Dolly the sheep, but then I used teh Googlz and found that scientist have subsequently cloned Rhesus monkeys with success. So now I only think it would be totally reckless to clone a human, given how limited our understanding of its long-term consequences are.

    --
    [Sir Garlon] is the marvellest knight that is now living, for he destroyeth many good knights, for he goeth invisible.
  3. Re:Fantasists by rolfwind · · Score: 3, Interesting

    So the only people that should be cloned are either athletes, models and porn actors/actresses.

    Porn "stars" probably should not be cloned because a lot of the value in a porn star is the novelty factor. The industry eats them up and spits them out. There's enough attractive people in the world willing to suck dick on camera for it to have next to no value.

    Besides, there's no need for real bodies, within 20 years mainstream porn will probably be entirely simulation, something like Hatsune Miku. User gets to direct the action, studios will make money on the upgrades like outfits, and won't have to pay the actress except a one time scanning fee. Studios will also be able to keep "actresses" exclusive and build brand name stars like comic books.

  4. Re:Fantasists by RobHostetter · · Score: 5, Interesting

    You are correct. OTOH my biological father had almost no contact with me from the age of 2 until I was 15. When I first met him it was uncanny. We talked the same, thought the same way, laughed the same. It was insane. My wife and my sister both get creeped out by how similar we are. So nurture is important, but nature is too!