Increased awareness and decreased acceptance of genome-editing technology: The impact of the Chinese twin babies

Deep Brain Stimulation for Consciousness Disorders; Technical and Ethical Considerations

Disorders of Consciousness (DoC) result in profound functional impairment, adversely affecting the lives of a predominantly younger patient population. Currently, effective treatment options for those who have reached chronicity (prolonged symptom duration over 4 weeks) are extremely limited, with the majority of such cases facing life-long dependence on carers and a poor quality of life. Here we briefly review the current evidence on caseload, diagnostic and management options in the United Kingdom (UK), United States of America (USA) and the European Union (EU). We identify key differences as well as similarities in these approaches across respective healthcare systems, highlighting unmet needs in this population. We subsequently present past efforts and the most recent advances in the field of surgical modulation of consciousness through implantable neurostimulation systems. We examine the ethical dilemmas that such a treatment approach may pose, proposing mediating solutions and methodological adjustments to address these concerns. Overall, we argue that there is a strong case for the utilisation of deep brain stimulation (DBS) in the DoC patient cohort. This is based on both promising results of recent clinical trials as well as technological developments. We propose a revitalization of surgical neuromodulation for DoC with a multicenter, multidisciplinary approach and strict monitoring guidelines, in order to not only advance treatment options but also ensure the safeguarding of patients' welfare and dignity.

Understanding the Factors Driving Consumers' Willingness to Pay for Gene-Edited Foods in China

Gene editing contributes to enhancing food security through the creation of novel foods. However, public perception of gene-edited (GE) foods is crucial to their acceptance and adoption. This study expanded the knowledge-attitude-practice model and constructed an integrated framework comprising four dimensions: demographic factors, scientific literacy and beliefs, social trust, and perceptions of gene technology, aimed at explaining the public's attitudes toward GE foods. A questionnaire survey was conducted (N = 649), revealing a positive attitude toward GE foods, with over 80% expressing a certain willingness to pay (WTP) for them. Factors such as income level, subjective knowledge, scientific beliefs, trust in scientists, trust in government, and trust in national technological capabilities and perceived benefits positively correlated with WTP. Conversely, objective knowledge, perceived risks, and perceived ethical concerns were negatively correlated with WTP. The impact of objective knowledge on attitudes toward GE foods demonstrated a significant, nonlinear relationship. Additionally, it is noteworthy that the Chinese public currently exhibits relatively low trust in national technological capabilities, necessitating vigilance against the emergence of conspiracy theories akin to those surrounding genetically modified foods. This research contributes theoretical insights into the public communication of GE foods.

U.S. public opinion about the safety of gene editing in the agriculture and medical fields and the amount of evidence needed to improve opinions

Introduction: Implementation of gene editing in agriculture and medicine hinges on public acceptance. The objectives of this study were to explore U.S. public opinion about gene editing in agricultural and medical fields and to provide more insight into the relationship between opinions about the safety of gene editing and the potential impact of evidence to improve opinions about safety. Methods: Data were from two samples of U.S. respondents: 1,442 respondents in 2021 and 3,125 respondents in 2022. Survey respondents provided their opinions about the safety of gene editing in the agricultural and medical fields and answered questions about the number of studies or length of time without a negative outcome to improve opinions about the safety of gene editing in the agricultural and medical fields. Results: Results indicated that respondents in both samples were more familiar, more likely to have an opinion about safety, and more positive about the safety of gene editing in the agricultural field than in the medical field. Also, familiarity was more closely associated with opinions about safety than the strength of opinions. Discussion: These findings add to the literature examining perceptions of gene editing in the agricultural or medical fields separately. Opinions about the safety of gene editing were generally more favorable for respondents who were aware of the use of gene editing. These results support a proactive approach for effective communication strategies to inform the public about the use of gene editing in the agricultural and medical fields.

The divide so wide: Public perspectives on the role of human genome editing in the US healthcare system

We report findings from two open-framed focus groups eliciting informed public opinion about the rapidly developing technology of human genome editing in the context of the US healthcare system. Results reveal that participants take a dim view of the present healthcare system, articulating extensive concerns about the accessibility and affordability of care. They feel that, unless these problems are resolved, they stand little chance of benefiting from any eventual human genome editing treatments. They prioritize improvement in healthcare access well above human genome editing development, and human genome editing regulation and oversight above human genome editing research. These results reveal substantial divergence between public perspectives and expert discourse on human genome editing. The latter attends primarily to the moral permissibility of technical categories of human genome editing research and how to treat human genome editing within existing regulatory and oversight systems rather than broader political-economic and healthcare access concerns. This divergence illustrates the importance of openly framed public engagement around emerging technologies.

Community engagement in genetics and genomics research: a qualitative study of the perspectives of genetics and genomics researchers in Uganda

BACKGROUND

Generally, there is unanimity about the value of community engagement in health-related research. There is also a growing tendency to view genetics and genomics research (GGR) as a special category of research, the conduct of which including community engagement (CE) as needing additional caution. One of the motivations of this study was to establish how differently if at all, we should think about CE in GGR.

AIM

To assess the perspectives of genetics and genomics researchers in Uganda on CE in GGR.

METHOD

A cross-sectional qualitative study was conducted at Makerere University and Uganda Virus Research Institute. Twenty-five individuals participated, the majority being male (sixteen). Participants included nineteen genetics and genomics researchers (researchers and research coordinators), two CE officers, three nurses and one nursing counsellor. Data were collected using in-depth interviews and analyzed in a thematic manner using NVivo version 12 Plus.

STUDY FINDINGS

Thirteen of the respondents had conducted CE in their GGR in either a geographical and disease-specific community. Some respondents said CE principles are the same and there is no need for special consideration for CE in GGR. Others gave ethical issues in GGR that require special consideration for CE in such research and these were categorized into six themes: GGR is new to communities, Difficulty in communicating GGR by the researchers, Genes are shared in communities, Cultural sensitivities against GGR, Community attitude toward GGR, Some GGR studies take long to end, and Negotiation of research benefits. Special considerations for CE when conducting GGR were suggested and categorized into seven themes: creating awareness of GGR in communities, obtaining both community acceptance and individual consent, CE team composition, involve communities in solving GGR challenges, prolong CE in some GGR, develop guidelines for CE in GGR, and legal considerations on GGR.

CONCLUSION

GGR was characterized by special issues that require special CE considerations for such research.

Managers' attitudes toward gene-editing technology and companies' R&D investment in gene-editing: the case of Chinese seed companies

The Chinese government has issued a series of new policies to make it easier to industrialize gene-edited crops. However, whether technological advantages will eventually translate into industrial advantages and whether farmers will soon have access to gene-edited varieties partly depends on seed companies' willingness to produce and sell gene-edited varieties to farmers and to invest in developing their own gene-edited varieties. This study utilizes data from a survey of 111 seed companies collected in 2019 before the implementation of new regulations. This study provides empirical evidence on whether gene-edited crops will be available to farmers. The results show that the number of companies conducting research on gene-edited crops is limited, mostly to large companies. Approximately 55% of seed company managers would consider developing and selling gene-edited crops modified by SDN-1 and SDN-2 site-directed nuclease genome editing without external genetic material, whereas 46% support crops modified by SDN-3, which require gene replacement or foreign deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) insertion and are regulated as genetically modified organisms (GMOs). The regression results show that large companies and companies with well-educated researchers are more likely to support and develop gene-editing technology. Past GM investment experience and collaboration with public institutions in gene-editing research increases the probability of company investment in gene editing R&D. These results suggest that gene-edited cultivars are more likely to be produced and sold to farmers in the future than GMOs, and that gene-edited agricultural products could have a significant market share of the seed market in the future.

Consumer acceptance of new plant-breeding technologies: An application to the use of gene editing in fresh table grapes

This study estimates consumers' willingness to pay for specific product (quality) and process (agronomic) attributes of table grapes, including taste, texture, external appearance, and the expected number of chemical applications, and for the breeding technology used to develop the plant. Considering varietal traits, on average our survey respondents were willing to pay the highest price premiums for specific offers of improvements in table grape taste and texture, followed by external appearance and expected number of chemical applications. Considering breeding methods, on average our respondents were willing to pay a small premium for table grapes developed using conventional breeding rather than gene editing (e.g., CRISPR). Results from a latent class model identify four different groups of consumers with distinct preferences for grape quality attributes and breeding technologies. The group of consumers most likely to reject gene editing considers both genetic engineering and gene editing to be breeding technologies that produce foods that are morally unacceptable and not safe to eat.

Ethical Perspectives of Therapeutic Human Genome Editing From Multiple and Diverse Viewpoints: A Scoping Review

Human genome editing has been increasingly explored to determine if it can be used to eradicate genetic diseases like sickle cell disease, but it has also been surrounded by a wide variety of ethical dilemmas. The purpose of this review was to conduct a scoping review of the ethics of therapeutic human genome editing in terms of philosophy, theology, public perspectives, and research ethics. A systemized search of PubMed, Embase, Ovid MEDLINE, and Web of Science was conducted. The initial search resulted in 4,445 articles, and after removing 1,750 duplicates and screening the remaining 2,695 articles, 27 final articles were selected for the final analysis. From a philosophical and theological standpoint, therapeutic human genome editing was generally ethically acceptable. Worldwide public perspectives were also in agreement except for the Oceanic region, which disagreed mainly due to the possible effects on future generations. Lastly, human research ethics revealed that women were not always included in informed consent, and that child autonomy needs to be preserved. Further research is needed to determine adverse effects on the mother, fetus, and future generations.

Communicating CRISPR: Challenges and opportunities in engaging the public

CRISPR technologies are advancing at a dizzying pace, and emerging cultural, sociopolitical, ethical, and legal implications continue to pose new challenges for public engagement. Recent calls for public engagement and dialogue on CRISPR applications stress the importance of nuanced thinking and responsible communication. In this chapter, we review public opinion research and find that a comprehensive and clear picture of global views on CRISPR is missing but is necessary to build the foundation for effective public engagement programs. We recommend community-based-participatory research as an inclusive and effective framework for shared knowledge production and decision-making practices for scientific experts and science communicators to engage in genuine and meaningful dialogue with community members in making informed consideration for important value-laden decisions. In response to the politicization of science, this chapter offers strategic communication techniques that can help those facilitating public engagement of CRISPR-based technologies keep cognitive biases, such as identity protective cognition, motivated reasoning, and confirmation bias, at bay.

Regulatory approaches for genome edited agricultural plants in select countries and jurisdictions around the world

Genome editing in agriculture and food is leading to new, improved crops and other products. Depending on the regulatory approach taken in each country or region, commercialization of these crops and products may or may not require approval from the respective regulatory authorities. This paper describes the regulatory landscape governing genome edited agriculture and food products in a selection of countries and regions.

Attitudes of Indonesian Medical Doctors and Medical Students Toward Genome Editing

Purpose

This study aimed to measure the attitudes of Indonesian medical doctors and students toward new technology in genome editing.

Materials and Methods

Online questionnaires regarding attitudes toward genome editing on health and non-health conditions, both in somatic cells and embryo, were distributed through researcher networks, email and social media specific to medical doctors and students. The data of 1055 valid questionnaires were processed; descriptive and association analyses between sociodemographic factors and attitudes toward genome editing were performed. Email in-depth interview was performed to explore the respondents’ answers.

Results

The results showed that Indonesian medical doctors’ and students’ knowledge of genome editing was limited and correlated with gender, place of residence, religion, education, marital status, childbearing and experience abroad. More than half of respondents supported genome editing for the treatment of fatal and debilitating diseases both in somatic cells and embryos, implying their consent to edited gene inheritance. However, this approval decreased when applied to non-health-related aspects, such as physical appearance, intelligence and strength. Factors affecting their attitudes toward genome editing included their status as medical doctors or students, gender, age, education, religion, economic status and place of residence.

Conclusion

Increasing knowledge and awareness of Indonesian medical doctors and students regarding genome editing is important. Even though its application in health-related matter was supported by a majority of the respondents, discussion from ethical and religious perspectives is necessary to ensure the acceptance.