Team:KULeuven/Ethics/Survey

From 2009.igem.org

(Difference between revisions)

Revision as of 17:00, 16 October 2009

General
Our project
Survey

Public opinion

We carried out a survey to probe the public opinion about synthetic biology. To create sample variation, we interviewed 45 people from different age groups and backgrounds. In general, most of the interviewees didn't object against this new domain in science. Although only few of them could correctle define "synthetic biology", they agree that researchers must be able to explore the field. Nevertheless, they insist on the necessity of a controlling system which insures safety during the research process. Before the bacteria are used outside of a lab, the risks should be minimized.

We asked the subjects what type of research in synthetic biology should be allowed. Most people have no problem with bacteria in their environment designed to solve major issues in human life. They insist that the synthetic bacteria must change the users' quality of life and it must be financially manageable for everyone. Some interviewed persons agree to the exploration of synthetic biology, but are hesitant to allow the bacteria outside of the laboratory or the closed environment of an industrial facility. Although there are still a few people who object against research, most of the interviewees are in favour of further study. Provided that a socially relevant goal is pursued and not just a luxury issue.

The last question of the survey asked asked the respondent if their opinion about synthetic biology could be more negative because they were not familiar with the subject. Most people agreed that 'not knowing' influences their opinion. So they would like an independent communication about the matter in a comprehensible language, that everybody understands. Some remark that the communication about synthetic biology depends on the amount of money that’s available and the reputation of the institution. This will also influence their opinion and so they recognize the problem of finding an independent and neutral communication.

Modifying organisms should …	Male	Female
…not be allowed	12%	4%
…only be allowed when it solves an issue	52%	64%
…only be allowed when the bacteria don’t come in contact with humans	24%	21%
…be allowed at any time	12%	11%

Other

We helped TU Delft with their [http://spreadsheets.google.com/viewform?formkey=dElEZjI4Vk0wWmxHTWoycG03b2RrQ3c6MA.. survey on reductionism in synthetic biology]. Follow the results on their wiki.

We completed the survey from the University of Valencia.

@@ Line 5: / Line 5: @@
 == Public opinion ==
-Because we asked ourselves what other people think about synthetic biology we did a survey. In this way we would get an idea about the public opinion. We randomly interviewed 45 people to create a variation in background. The main conclusion is that the Interviewees actually aren’t very negative about synthetic biology. Although most people don’t know exactly what it includes, they agree that researchers must be able to explore the field. But they insist there has to be a controlling system, insuring safety during the research process. Before the bacteria are used outside of a lab, the risks should be minimized.
+We carried out a survey to probe the public opinion about synthetic biology. To create sample variation, we interviewed 45 people from different age groups and backgrounds. In general, most of the interviewees didn't object against this new domain in science. Although only few of them could correctle define "synthetic biology", they agree that researchers must be able to explore the field. Nevertheless, they insist on the necessity of a controlling system which insures safety during the research process. Before the bacteria are used outside of a lab, the risks should be minimized.
-We asked the subjects what type of research in synthetic biology should be allowed. Most people would have no problem with bacteria in their environment, designed to solve major issues in human life. They remark that the synthetic bacteria must change the users' quality of life  and it must be financially manageable for everyone. Some interviewed persons would allow synthetic biology to be explored, but think that it’s best if the bacteria stay in the laboratory or in the closed environment of an industrial facility. Although there are few persons who don’t think the research about synthetic biology has to be allowed, most people think that if a good goal is pursued it’s important to allow the research. They want the goal to be socially relevant and not just a luxury product.
+We asked the subjects what type of research in synthetic biology should be allowed. Most people have no problem with bacteria in their environment designed to solve major issues in human life. They insist that the synthetic bacteria must change the users' quality of life and it must be financially manageable for everyone. Some interviewed persons agree to the exploration of synthetic biology, but are hesitant to allow the bacteria outside of the laboratory or the closed environment of an industrial facility. Although there are still a few people who object against research, most of the interviewees are in favour of further study. Provided that a socially relevant goal is pursued and not just a luxury issue.
-At the end of the survey we asked if they thought their opinion about synthetic biology was more negative because they’re not familiar with the subject. Most people agreed that not knowing influences their opinion. So they would like an independent communication about the matter in a comprehensible language, that everybody understands. Some remark that the communication about synthetic biology depends on the amount of money that’s available and the reputation of the institution. This will also influence their opinion and so they recognize the problem of finding an independent and neutral communication.
+The last question of the survey asked asked the respondent if their opinion about synthetic biology could be more negative because they were not familiar with the subject. Most people agreed that 'not knowing' influences their opinion. So they would like an independent communication about the matter in a comprehensible language, that everybody understands. Some remark that the communication about synthetic biology depends on the amount of money that’s available and the reputation of the institution. This will also influence their opinion and so they recognize the problem of finding an independent and neutral communication.