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

Yes, but only in terms of preventing disease, disorders, or significant health issues. Never for physical appearance/ designer babies

Yes, however, it needs to be highly regulated, and should only be used to fix any health issues, not make super children with specific gender, eye color, hair color, etc. We are a vain society, this should be used to weed out health issues.

Yes, we can always relax regulations. We can't undo regrettable or tragic things that may occur if we allow it freely.

Yes, but only for germ line (reproductive) mutations that could be passed on to children. Gene therapy to treat single gene mutation disorders in adults should be permitted and subsidized.

Yes, it should not be used for cosmetic purposes, but it should be contained to be studied and used to dance our medical knowledge.

Yes, it should be allowed but only for medically necessary reasons such as preventing Alzheimer's or sickle cell.

No but there should be oversight by a qualified medical community whether government or professional.

As long as nothing is forced on anyone, they should be able to do whatever they want. Ethics are only the problem of the ones doing the act, until it begins to affect others.

Yes, I think it's wise to be careful when it comes to the human genome, but do not limit the research.

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

Yes, but with applicable regulatory laws that allow for a case to be taken to trial should an organization using CRISPR commit harmful acts against an individual or other group.

Yes, though only to make sure we don't decide to use it on a massive scale without the public knowing. It could be used on human cells and potentially comatose patients whose families allow it. It could cure certain genetic diseases one day.

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

This should be banned and not allowed unless for a medical reason like fighting cancer or something. Keep it away from plants and animals and anything else.

Depends on the use. Suppose it's for physical modifications for a fetus that isn't born yet, then no. If it's for life-threatening conditions, then yes.

Some regulation may be necessary to curb unethical use cases, but this doesn't mean we should stifle innovation and expand the avenue of this technology.

Depends on what genetic modifications are. as long as they help the person become healthier not more dangerous.

This kind of technology is a key to fix incurable illness. However, overuse of this technology would make this society more unfair and chaotic. Therefore, except for the genetic disease, it should be regulated

Yes, but it has to be a careful balance between reducing disease and mortality and full blown eugenics

I do not personally believe in altering genetics. I think that money could be better spent elsewhere, but if other people want it then sure.

To an extent, but only for severe cases, such as Down syndrome or life threatening conditions and diseases like progeria.

They should only intervene if it is completely necessary, but most of the time I think its unnecessary for the government to be stifling the process of creating break through technology.

Yes, It should be prevented from use, because all people are made equal and in God's Image, NOT MAN'S!

I think CRISPR technology could be used for great things, but to prevent unethical things from happening, minimal restrictions should be added.

Yes, the idea that human beings should be genetically perfected is a slippery slope towards dystopia

They shouldn't completely prevent it but they should make a punishment for it being used in bad ways such as switching an unborn babies gender genetically

Yes, but specifically for extremely harmful/damaging disabilities that'd make the life of the newborn painful/short

I think that their needs to be laws put in place to ensure that CRISPR isn't misused but can be used to help treat people.

Yes, and we shouldn’t be genetically engineering anything at all. It’s never a good idea to play God with these things

If we're talking about using CRISPR to remove neurodivergence in babies, yes, because that's just eugenics. Treat neurodiverse people like actual humans and pass policy that helps them. If we're talking about removing autoimmune disorders or preventing any physical disability that harms the person's well-being, no. The tech still has to be used wisely, but I think ensuring autoimmune disorders are a thing of the past is good.

There would need to be a lot of testing and safety measure to ensure that CRISPR won't be dangerous.

it should be regulated, but not only in the hands of the wealthy. If we can prevent severe debilitating genetic disease, everyone should have access to increase quality of life.

Yes, we should allow progression, but implementation should be regulated because it can communize us and get rid of uniqueness.

Maybe, in the instance of developing cures for life-threatening diseases, genetic diseases, or disabilities to those who wish for treatment.

Yes, because it could get out of hand and make sure any test subjects consent to the potential after affects of the modification.

Yes, but if something were to go wrong in the treatment the hospital of whoever provided the modifications be the one to pay for the fix.

Genetic manipulation of DNA is dangerous and can lead to more problems, I feel. However, if this technology advances the government should regulate its usage guidelines.

They can do and execute it in morality, no test and verification on humans before claryiying it safe.

Individuals with a degree in biomedical sciences specifically a PhD would be granted permission to regulate and educate the public on CRISPR with MD or BS degree holders working in conjunction with doctorate level scientists to ensure that the technology is being used ethically. Government officials that have no educational background in the area of biomedical sciences and the specific area of genetics related to CRISPR technology should not be regulating the use of this technology. Government officials lack understanding of genetics and it is a huge disservice to our country to give individuals the power to regulate such topics without a thorough education.

No, this will just lead to slower breakthrough and more expensive regulations over time that will cause the medical industry to drag its feet.

So that people know what is being customized into them by modifications and it needs to be specific.

This is not a yes or no question- yes for curing disease and saving lives as part of healthcare- no for the super wealthy to be able to buy "super babies"

I believe that CRISPR is best used when necessary for people with harmful/extreme genetic diseases/disabilities, and should be offered when it is completely researched with its pros and cons for the long-term. As it is a new use of technology and not completely safe, knowing that the studies,have shown CRISPR participants have died from the practice,as well with the probability of increased risk of unknown genetic health problems that could be passed down to generations.

This is a loaded question that doesn't allow for an answer that does not support human genetic modification.

No, as long as the companies using this technology publicly disclose the risks and benefits to the modified individuals

This question is a hit and miss it depends on what the people on a problem would like to happen so if they want it to be done than yes but if they don't want anything to be done then I wouldn't want anything to happen.

If it benefits in helping preventing or curing diesease then yes, but if it is used for bad intentions then no.

It should be regulated, but only to ensure that its use is ethical. Scientific progress is important, but not more important than practicing said science humanely.

The people should regulate it so as to avoid having the government or scientists use it to enforce eugenics

The government should strive to be technologically literate and our laws should be able to match the speed at which technology is advancing

No, but they should allow transparency to the public on what it is they are doing, the purpose, and how much is being funded.

Yes, though regulations should be for monitoring and public transparency into research rather than restriction on progress and innovation

i dont really know bc one hand its helpful on another its dangerous so its something I need to research more

Yikes. At this point, America isn't leading science in much dna and so they should be regulated because they're in kindergarten. As far their participation in global learning, there should be less regulation from the US.

Yes once it has been adequately studied and proven safe for human use, and is solely used for the requested purpose of treating disease and illness

It should only be used in a moral way to help people continue to have a normal life not to create life

There should be some regulation, but not enough to majorly interfere with innovation and scientific progress.

Yes, regulate but do not stifle innovation and speed with early testing. Must take time getting these out to the masses. Instead of death sentences, inmates on death row should be required to give back to humanity with experimental testing

I think there should be limits on what we can do with it. We shouldn’t just be able to modify whatever we want.

No, I think it shown be used to change someone's gender under the age of 21 but should be used to help people that are struggling with their heath and to make innovative treatment

I think this should be an optional experimentation, that is thoroughly thought and talked through. I think that all risks should be conversed and each individual should understand the weight of the experiment for the people and for their own personal health.

No, and the government should not mitigate the progress of scientific revelations that could cure the incurable.

some regulations should be in place as long as it doesn't specifically effect the research being made

I think for the betterment of humanity, removing genetic illnesses is essential. But eugenics is terrofying

Yes. The regulation should be that genetic modifications should be to try to correct/reduce genetic abnormalities that affect the general populace. It should not go towards genetic enhancement, such as "super powers" or be weaponized to bolster our military or develop biological weapons.

It has the potential to unlock pandoras box in "choosing your own children". It does have use in researching cures for diseases and cancer.

Yes, but only with clear conditions laid out front with willing subjects, public understanding, and a requirement of at least a basic level of understanding before experimentations.

CRISPR technology for treatment of disease based in genetics should be regulated similarly to those regulations in place for all medications. The potential application for CRISPR for gene editing cosmetically, however, should be regulated much more closely to truly assess the possible effects of truly unnecessary intervention for the sake of designing what you want your child to be like.

It seems like a good idea but then again it could and most definitely be abused by people in government, so no… It is a scary thought.

Yes, but only to ensure ethical and moral standards are followed and not to hinder progress in cancer and disease cures.

I think it is important for science and understanding, but if it is a threat of something it can be slightly regulated.

Yes, it should be restricted to trained professionals. Gene modification should be it's own field of study that requires a doctorate's in order to be considered a trained professional.

It should only be used for purposes of disease and disability, not ANY phenotypic - no visual aesthetic reasons

No, with Chevron overruled the government will not be able to keep up and make decisions that reflect the science and advice of experts

Yes, there will always be individuals who will use that power to bad or their own personal gain, regulation is necessary.

Yes, creating laws and regulations now will prevent unintended consequences and ensure a code of ethics is strictly followed

For the sake of preventing certain things or benefitting certain things under specific circumstances, mostly pro-health care.

If the kid will have genetic issues in its life that will endanger its existence, then yes, otherwise no.

I think it needs to be tested more, and eventually tested on humans. Should only be used to prevent the passage of disease or death.

No, because the use of CRISPR should be regulated by a board of highly informed science professionals, not the government

This should be used for only medical purposes but shouldn't be abused to modify DNA for really cruel and unusual purposes

This subject is incredibly touchy, CRISPR in the wrong hands is awful, but at the same could change everything. CRISPR is inherently good, but Regulation IS important.

Yes, while I disagree with most government regulation, it should not be possible to modify the human body in such a way for no real benefit.

Yes, but not for cloning or picking attributes like beauty, height, intelligence, etc. It should only be used for preventing disease.

only for personal wants of consumption but the government should pay and try and get it more implemented

There is a thin line in regards to the research and would like strict guidelines on this if implemented

Yes, CRISPR technology should be ethically used. Government needs to ensure the constitutional liberties of all are maintained.

To an extent; scientists involved and these studies and government officials should work hand in hand for the mutual betterment of human health and society.

Yes, there should be some regulation to ensure safety, but it also allows for innovation and progress.

Yes, it's dangerous to give those with the financial means the ability to substantially alter the qualities of their children, and it also violates the child's rights to decide to alter their appearance before they can elect to do so

Yes but the government needs to have experts in the field to understand the research being done, and not rely on Congress or political segments to make laws or rules on something they don't even grasp. Scientific research should not be used for political gain of senators or representatives.

Yes and ban the use of human genetic modification for everything except hereditary disease prevention

At this point, I don't think the technology is commercially available enough to be regulated by the government.