NEWS

Americans Concerned About Ethics, Morality of Scientific Research, Survey Shows

Sanyin Siang

While Americans are optimistic about and supportive of the progress made in the life sciences, they are also concerned about the ethical and moral implications of these advances, according to a recent nationwide survey conducted by Virginia Commonwealth University in Richmond.

The survey also shows that a majority of Americans are interested in new developments in science even though only a relatively small percentage consider themselves well informed about science.

The VCU life sciences survey included 1,122 adults nationwide and focused on genetics and stem cell research as a base for gauging American perception of advances in science and technology. The survey results were reported just a month before to the November announcement of a successfully cloned human embryo by Advanced Cell Technology, Worcester, Mass.

"We wanted to conduct the survey because we were concerned that there might be a growing wariness by significant sectors of the public about the moral implications of the technology in the life sciences revolution," said Thomas F. Huff, Ph.D., vice provost for life sciences at VCU.

Role of Religion

Religious devotion has a strong influence on an individual’s perspective of scientific and medical developments, the survey showed. Those who are more religious, measured by attendance at religious services or self-reported reliance on religious guidance, are more likely to perceive science as not paying enough attention to moral values in society and have ethical concerns regarding stem cells and genetic testing. This group is also more likely to trust information provided by religious leaders on stem cell research (67% of this group compared with 54% of all Americans).

Charles Alley, Ph.D., rector of the St. Matthews Episcopal in Richmond, Va., noted that, historically, science and religion have been seen as being on opposite sides of certain issues. In addition, he continued, "We are a culture that relies on specialists, and ministers in general represent themselves as technically challenged. Going to a clergy person about science would be like going to a psychologist for a heart transplant. However, the faith community is an important and necessary voice in the dialogue when it comes to moral decision making."

The survey also found that only a small number of Americans (11%) label themselves "very informed" about scientific discoveries and that 48% had not even heard of the Human Genome Project. While only one in 10 Americans consider themselves very informed about scientific developments, there is reason to believe that public interest in science is much higher. Forty-three percent of the nation said they have a lot of interest in new scientific developments, and another 44% expressed at least some interest in new developments.

"Clearly, the public at large is receptive to learning more even if at the moment precious few hold much specific knowledge about genetics and genomics," Huff said. "This provides a clear opportunity to the scientific community. We have a large audience who sorely need a basic understanding of modern genetics, and that audience appears quite willing to listen if only we could get the message across."

Trusting Specialists

The survey showed that the public trusts scientific specialists—specifically, physicians, genetic counselors, and "scientists involved in genetic research." Between two-thirds and three-quarters of the public have confidence in these specialists to protect people from the misuse of genetic information.

Once again, Americans are shown to be skeptical of media information. Instead of seeing the media as a public watchdog, the public is skeptical and suspicious that the media will misuse sensitive information. The survey results suggested that, to raise genetic literacy, there needs to be more venues to put scientific expertise in public view, even if the way it reaches the public is through mass media outlets.

VCU made several recommendations based on the survey results. The recommendations ranged from improving genetic literacy to engaging discussion between scientists, policy makers, media, and the public about the ethical and moral concerns of scientific research, Huff said.



             
Copyright © 2001 Oxford University Press (unless otherwise stated)
Oxford University Press Privacy Policy and Legal Statement