The Genes Genie?

It probably depends on how a question is phrased, the target audience, as well as changing times? The Progressive Educational Trust (PET) report that more than 50% of UK participants surveyed, backed genome editing to prevent children from developing severe disease (https://www.theguardian.com/science/2022/jun/22/half-in-uk-back-genome-editing-to-prevent-severe-diseases). Genome editing (CRISPR) can modify (or even eliminate) the actions of specific genes. The technology's impact is less 'dramatic' than using Genetic Modification (GM or Gene splicing). Having said that, this new acceptance level for genome editing in children, is orders of magnitude superior to the orchestrated antipathy to GM 'Frankenstein Foods'. In fairness, even GM has always seemed more acceptable, to the general public, when used to advance medical treatments (e.g. insulin and growth hormone production), rather than for developing new crops in agriculture. Having said that, PET is an organisation aiming to improve the medical acceptance of genetic applications. 'Children' and 'severe disease' were stressed as factors in the question. Most people would not want children to suffer. I suspect that potential 'downsides' of CRISPR were not emphasised in the questionnaires. These might include parents wanting to change the eye or hair colour of their offspring. The full genomes of children would also have to be determined before treatment. Although that information should be medically confidential, 'leaks' might well be exploited by insurance companies, mortgage lenders and banks. Genome editing is still, however, a good way to deal with clear inherited medical problems.