Should the government fund research into genetic engineering for disease prevention and treatment?

No

Most disease prevention falls under the NHS, CDC, WHO. I would like division between this researcher and these governing bodies.

Perhaps, but heavily regulate what counts as a disease - such technology could easily turn into eugenics.

Only if the benefits are given freely to the population. If tax payer money has funded the developments then the taxpaying user has already paid. Companies should not profit from this funding

Yes, but absolutely no gain of function or anything bordering on gain of function on viruses etc. that do not exist in nature (yet).

only genetic therapies for diseases such as cancer/heart disease/Alzheimers , not neurotypes or learning disabilities

I like the research I don't like the spending. Researching future diseases can be funded by insurance and pharmaceutical profits, then when that disease arrives they can profit from prevention.

Maybe. There should be limitations on how this research is conducted including ethical, environmental, and humanitarian reasons.

Yes, but in a controlled way, you have to be super careful about what you're managing out of the population

Yes - to ensure any innovations are for all and not restricted to those who can pay

I think we would need to look into navigating any ethical issues. Also, if it is more likely to cause issues down the line, such as overuse of antibiotics had become a problem, then we need to consider if this is worth it or are we creating more problems for future generations to have to deal with.

Yes, but proposed research should go through an ethical review process to make sure it doesn't veer into eugenics.

I think more research needs to be done first to mitigate the potential risksvof unintended consequences

Yes, but only if society at large benefits from the outcome and results cannot be monetised privately.

Ethical research is needed to fully understand, but very careful consideration for practical application and regulation is required.

Only with the absolute strictest of regulations, and only the most incurable and unlivable disabilities/disorders/diseases

Yes, but deep underground, it can never get out if something goes wrong. Humans can’t be trusted with this alone. Nobody leave facilities without several protocols.

Yes but this (and CRISPR) must be addressed with birth control - making people live longer means more people are around and in many places this is unsustainable

Yes, but they should go through all ethics and research authorities before carrying out any form of modifications to human genetics.

Think we already tried that with COVID 19 and it didn't turn out all that well did it? Much stricter regulations and safety procedures need put in place to ensure these genetically modified diseases and viruses don't escape again.

Only where it’s clear cut and effective and risk of side effects outweighs condition

Yes, but only where there is a clear and achievable goal of reducing diseases that are costly to treat and affect many people. It should be done on a value for money basis.

How would you feel if genetic engineering could allow you to choose certain traits in your future children?

Would you want to know if your DNA had been engineered, or do you think the results matter more than the process?

How might society change if everyone could eliminate health risks or enhance abilities using genetic engineering?

Is there a trait or characteristic you would want to change about yourself if genetic modification were available?

What fears come to mind when you think about modifying the DNA of living organisms, and are those fears valid?

Should all people have equal access to genetic engineering, or is it okay if only those who can afford it use it?

How do you think genetically modified humans would be treated in society—is it more likely to bring equality or division?

Would you support genetic engineering if it were only used for medical purposes, or does that still raise concerns for you?

Is it more dangerous for us to not explore the benefits of genetic engineering, or to take the risk of using it without fully understanding the consequences?

Do you think altering genes to eliminate diseases crosses an ethical line, or is it just a natural progression of science?