Published November 9, 2017
| Version v1
Dataset
Open
Public views on gene editing and its uses
Creators
-
George Gaskell1
-
Imre Bárd1
-
Agnes Allansdottir2
- Rui Vieira da Cunha3
- Peter Eduard4
- Juergen Hampel5
-
Elisabeth Hildt6
- Christian Hofmaier5
- Nicole Kronberger7
- Sheena Laursen4
- Anna Meijknecht8
- Salvör Nordal9
- Alexandre Quintanilha3
- Gema Revuelta10
- Núria Saladié10
- Judit Sándor11
- Júlio Borlido Santos3
- Simone Seyringer7
-
Ilina Singh12
- Han Somsen8
- Vincent Torre13
- Márton Varju11
- Hub Zwart14
- 1. Department of Methodology, London School of Economics, London, UK.
- 2. Toscana Life Sciences Foundation, Siena, Italy.
- 3. Institute of Molecular and Cellular Biology, Porto, Portugal.
- 4. Experimentarium, Science Communication Centre, Copenhagen, Denmark.
- 5. Center for Interdisciplinary Risk and Innovation Studies, Stuttgart University, Stuttgart, Germany.
- 6. Center for the Study of Ethics in the Professions, Illinois Institute of Technology, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
- 7. Department of Social and Economic Psychology Johannes Kepler University, Linz, Austria.
- 8. Tilburg Institute for Law, Technology, and Society, Tilburg University, Tilburg, The Netherlands.
- 9. Centre for Ethics University of Iceland, Reykjavik, Iceland.
- 10. Centre on Science, Communication and Society Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona, Spain.
- 11. The Center for Ethics and Law in Biomedicine Central European University, Budapest, Hungary.
- 12. Department of Psychiatry and Oxford Uehiro Centre University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
- 13. Centre for Neurobiology, International School for Advanced Studies, Trieste, Italy.
- 14. Institute for Science, Innovation and Society Radboud University of Nijmegen, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Description
Rapid advances in genome editing, including CRISPR-Cas9 endonucleases, and their potential application in medicine and enhancement have been hotly debated by scientists and ethicists. Although a veto on germ line gene editing has been proposed1, the use of gene editing on human cells in the clinical context remains controversial, particularly for interventions aimed at enhancement2. In a report on human genome editing the US National Academy of Sciences (NAS) note that “important questions raised with respect to genome editing include how to incorporate societal values into salient clinical and policy consideration”3. We report here our research that opens a window onto what the public think.
Files
Files
(49.9 MB)
| Name | Size | Download all |
|---|---|---|
|
md5:5940b0ad681fcf66b879a6845c2a57c7
|
49.9 MB | Download |