Two-thirds of Americans approve of editing human DNA to treat disease
By Alessandra Potenza, The Verge | 08. 30. 2017
About two-thirds of Americans support the use of gene editing to treat diseases, according to a new survey. But opinions vary a lot based on people’s religious beliefs and how much they know about gene editing in general.
The research, published earlier this month in Science, shows that across the board, people want to be involved in a public discussion about editing the human genome. And that conversation with scientists and public officials needs to happen now, as the technology is still developing, says study co-author Dietram Scheufele, a science communication scholar at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. The results are based on a survey of 1,600 US adults conducted in December 2016 and January 2017.
The goal of the survey was to probe public opinion on a revolutionary piece of technology that’s advancing fast, Scheufele tells The Verge. The advent of powerful gene editing tools like CRISPR is making editing human DNA incredibly easy and precise. The technology holds the potential to rid humanity of diseaseslike sickle cell anemia. Earlier this month, researchers in the US...
Related Articles
By Roberto Andorno and Alicia Ely Yamin, Open Global Rights | 01.08.2019
The gene-editing scandal that made headlines in late November, with researcher He Jiankui claiming to have created twin girls whose DNA he had altered at the embryo stage, heightened global awareness of a consequential and close-at-hand decision about how...
By Jing-Bao Nie, Neil Pickering, Hastings Bioethics Forum | 12.13.2018
When the world’s first research on editing the genes of human embryos by Chinese scientists was published in an international journal in 2015, a report in the New York Timescharacterised the key issue involved as “a scientific ethical divide...
Three of the most influential scientific organizations in the world are calling for an urgent international effort to prevent scientists from creating any more gene-edited babies without proper approval and supervision.
Global standards are needed quickly to ensure gene-editing of...
When considering whether and how to proceed with regulating human germline gene editing, everyone supports public engagement. The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NAS), the Nuffield Council on Bioethics, and the Center for Genetics and Society (CGS) all recommend a robust public debate. But no one really knows how to conduct one, and all too many efforts lay a heavy hand on one of the scales.
The first step would seem to involve asking and answering the superficially...
