Should the government regulate the use of CRISPR technology for human genetic modifications?

Yes, but only in terms of preventing disease, disorders, and significant health issues. This should not be applied to physical appearance.

No, but a non-government organization should closely monitor its use and clearly disclose the risks involved.

Yes, but via proper oversight boards comprised of individuals with understanding of the processes to ensure fair regulation and continued innovation in scientific process

Government doesn’t need to constantly regulate things BUT this should be a willingness participation type situation and not something that’s unbeknownst to a patient. If they(the patient) want to
opt in they should be allowed. But always give the option

Crispr is an abomination. Humans are not meant to be edited or experiment on in this way, or at all.

It's a loaded question but I like the progression society has shown with genetic modifications. I believe it to be more helpful than harmful as of today.

Yes, at the state or local level. There should be basic laws implemented to protect human life and dignity.

No, but there should be a semi-annual review with HHS to determine that nothing presenting a risk to the population is being done. If there is something questionable, an alternative path could be renewed at that time. But nothing from legislators who are not trained scientists.

No, I feel like its a persons choice if they want genetic modifications or not, its like botox, it can harm you but people use it at their own risk. There could be an age restriction though.

Yes, but be careful with what practices they use and make sure the people involved have the right qualifications to do these modifications.

Yes, because some of the technology could prevent chronic disease or disabilities. As a person with ADHD I would never wish anyone to be born with it. A person wouldn't want to be born anemic if there was a chance they could of had their genes changed.

We should see if we can use it to make the next generation of Americans superhuman and immune to genetic diseases. In other words optimize our dna to be resilient to illnes. Healthier, smarter, physically stronger. Anything beyond that is highly unethical and becomes Eugenics.

depends, if it is used to help with life-threatening diseases than yes, but if it's to just make an individual's life better like to prevent albinism than no.

Yes but only if it's a deadly disease which is common in the family and the parents/guardians consent to the genetic modification.

Not regulate but maybe oversee while maintaining all things ethical and moral.

This should only be used in the cases of trying to remove a deadly inherited disease

It depends on whether it is safe and what it will be used for

Yes, only to make a genetically passed disease disappear, but not to tamper with appearance or neurodivergences.

Somewhat. I believe that this technology should be regulated and ONLY used for terminal diseases or something similar.

Yes. This sounds like humans trying to play God. Kind of like Frankenstein.

If the person has a diseases like sickle-cell anemia then yes, but if it just for personal gain then no.

Yes, I believe it’s important for Darwinism to happen and for natural selection to happen

CRISPR shouldn’t even be a thing. The government should regulate it to where it doesn’t get out of control.

If it is used within safe and ethical boundaries then I think it is ok to proceed.

Depending on the exact modifications it is being used for

There should be no genetic modifications to human DNA

Yes, this technology would be unethical if used to edit genomes in humans

Yes, although it should be regulated by not letting scientists modify humans for looks.

Yes but only if the people(s) involved, including fetuses and embryos, consent.

Maybe, I believe basic ethical oversight is necessary, whether it stems from the government or the scientific community. However, we must allow and perhaps encourage innovation that benefits society.

no, the government should wait for at the very least, another 20 years. this type of technology is not safe cannot be determined safe without lots of testing and real life evaluations.

Used to get rid of or cure cancer, I'm all for it. Used to make someone taller or smarter or faster....no.

to make a bloodline disease disappear YES, to create a homunculus NO

Only if they are used in medical ways, not to make designer babies

Yes, if it doesn't pose a dangerous threat to society or evolution in general

Yes, but each state should vote on many of the regulations.

They should only disallow negative or politically radical gene modifications

Yes and no, as long as it doesn’t affect a life..Mainly depends on the situation.

I think it depends specifically on who is doing the editing of genomes. It can be helpful but it depends in general.

I think it could be useful but also should be warning

Yes, should be used only in necessary medical procedures.

if used the right way if it could prevent genetic diseases or any other health problems im all for it.

If the modification is being done to help correct something that is wrong, then I think it's good. If it's to change your kids eye color, that's just unnecessary.

Yes, ensure the overseer’s of the regulation are not corrupt and are ethical themselves and that they don’t get in the way of progress

As long as this doesn't go to the eugenics route then its good

this is eugenic either way and shouldn't be a thing

It should be used for the good of humanity and duties