Try the political quiz
+

Filter by author

Narrow down the conversation to these participants:

64 Replies

 @ISIDEWITHDiscuss this answer...9mos9MO

Yes

 @9YLQXQJfrom Newfoundland  disagreed…4mos4MO

We don't have sufficient understanding to be playing with hundreds of thousands of years of evolution.

 @ISIDEWITHDiscuss this answer...9mos9MO

No

 @9T878LKfrom Ontario  agreed…6mos6MO

Don't do it. God made us the way we are in His image and to change that would be basically saying the the Lord of the universe didn't do a good enough job.

 @9VVGC59from British Columbia  answered…5mos5MO

No, we should not open the pandora's box to modifying DNA which can have harmful social implications in the future

 @B2SXCQRfrom Alberta  answered…1mo1MO

It's too diverse of a question to be filtered into a yes or no. Science has the change to have a negative impact

 @B2PT6BZfrom Ontario  answered…1mo1MO

Yes, the research should be done within reason (the research could lead to more knowledge about diseases, but also lead to a dark side of eugenics)

 @B2YXXYGfrom Ontario  commented…4wks4W

Just as we saw delayed responses to thalidomide, the negative side effects are appearing "in spades", following the recent mRNA experiment. Lets instead use the multitude of holistic options which have proved themselves over the centuries. Lets also remember that "we" are not meant to be here on this planet "forever" and that there is nothing wrong with "natural causes" and/or "natural solutions". When are we ever going to accept that the (p)harmaceutical industry is primarily a profit-driven industry? When are we going to stop allowing them to experiment on us, and at our expense??

 @9TMMVLNNew Democraticfrom Alberta  answered…6mos6MO

I would say yes to some extent as long as it's for a preventional reason like for instance preventing a deadly disease that affects the whole society not on just a handful on people..

 @9T9YZJHfrom British Columbia  answered…6mos6MO

No, but in the future, if diseases like monkey pox was to reach a covid 19 level of concern, then I would want that a top priority.

 @9RZPX67from Alberta  answered…7mos7MO

no, that is nothing but neo eugenics, a neo nazi school of thought, which our government and forefathers disagree with/ died protecting against

 @9QNDV5PRhinocerosfrom Ontario  answered…8mos8MO

They have to be VERY VERY VERY careful when they do it but it can save lives and somebody is going to do it eventually so yes

 @B299V9Wfrom Ontario  answered…2mos2MO

The government research regarding health care is too corrupt and tied with psychopathic CDC and big Pharma.

 @9YJ9C4Yfrom Ontario  answered…4mos4MO

It’s a thin line. Lots of rules would have to be set in place for using this kind of thing for me to feel comfortable about the idea.

 @9WW3GTHfrom Alberta  answered…4mos4MO

It depends on what is being considered a disease. Considering homosexuality was classified as a disease not too long ago, it seems like too much of a blanket term to be in usage for genetic prevention.

 @9WBDHC5Greenfrom British Columbia  answered…5mos5MO

well any government cannot be trusted at any level about medical research since we all know who finances all this...

 @9W46KMMGreenfrom British Columbia  answered…5mos5MO

Yes, make it as long as one’s life can ever last. A democracy to quality humans leads to a greater future of humanity in Canada’s society.

 @9VPGGY4New Democraticfrom British Columbia  answered…5mos5MO

We should ask more ethical questions before going full steak ahead. Ask more philosophical and ethical questions

 @9VJZTNPConservativefrom Alberta  answered…5mos5MO

Yes, but only if they companies provide yearly breakdowns of where the funds are going. After 5 years if they don't provide any (proven) improvements, funding stops.

 @9V2YV4Bfrom British Columbia  answered…6mos6MO

No, I don’t want the government funding things, but genetic engineering is cool and fun. Plus, who knows? Maybe we get a superhero out of it!

 @B3HJK9Rfrom Manitoba  answered…1wk1W

I support genetic testing for the purpose of empowering patients to make decisions better-informed decisions regarding their health and bodily autonomy. I wouldn't support genetic engineering without very strong, robust, and properly communicated safeguards against unethical practices and eugenics.

 @B3FC9K9from Ontario  answered…1wk1W

I think there’s a science answer to this and there’s a humanity answer to this… I don’t know which one to give.

 @B35B8BDfrom Ontario  answered…3wks3W

No, they should fund more research in preventative medicines like stress management, environmental toxins and nutrition.

 @B34QTLRfrom Ontario  answered…3wks3W

Yes, however as long as the labs the genetic engineering is occurring are monitored to ensure safety and sanitization.

 @B2Y34W9from Alberta  answered…4wks4W

yes, but there should be a requirement to have a way to reverse or neutralize any genetic engineering in case there are harmful unexpected outcomes

 @B2Y2G57from Alberta  answered…4wks4W

Yes, but there should be a requirement for some kind of 'reversal' or 'neutralization' for the treatment in case there are unexpected results

 @B2W3N3Hfrom Ontario  answered…1mo1MO

Yes but with appropriate safeguarding to protect individuals and their genetic makeup and ensure there is no negatives with having genetic material available to insurance companies.

 @B2VNVNWfrom British Columbia  answered…1mo1MO

Only if they are willing to commit money to social programs that keep unhealthy people housed and cared for. Just because you treat a disease and prolong life doesn’t mean the quality of life is great.

 @B2V8SXTfrom Alberta  answered…1mo1MO

Maybe a little bit for more serious diseases, but everything must be done ethically, so it might be better if it was done privately. Still ethically.

 @B2PMG8Rfrom Ontario  answered…1mo1MO

There are better things to focus on than creating better genetics for the future and should focus on the now

 @B2PJLMBfrom Ontario  answered…1mo1MO

Under strict and unbiased supervision, with plenty of long-term testing and full knowledge of any potentially harmful side effects.

 @B2LZCJTfrom Ontario  answered…1mo1MO

I believe this should be done for things like cancer, Parkinson’s, and other similar diseases that gradually become more prevalent and limits cognitive abilities as you age. But it is a slippery slope into eugenics.

 @B2J775Mfrom Ontario  answered…2mos2MO

Yes, but only to treat and prevent diseases, not to genetically engineer people or lean towards eugenics.

 @B2HS45Hfrom Alberta  answered…2mos2MO

Yes, but not used to alter babies under any circumstance. Only adults should be allowed access to genetic alteration

 @B2BG5ZYfrom New York  answered…2mos2MO

Yes as long as they don’t allow changes to an embryo.. so the change only affects an already born person.

 @9ZRT2HKfrom Ontario  answered…4mos4MO

yes but only to treat and prevent diseases but not to genetically engineer people for any other reason

 @9WC2362from British Columbia  answered…5mos5MO

Yes, as long as the advancements are thoroughly tested and verified to be free of long term negative side effects

 @9W8GJCBfrom Ontario  answered…5mos5MO

To the highest degree, this is an extremely important issue with keeping people alive and preventing possible biological warfare.

 @9VGP5FZLiberalfrom British Columbia  answered…5mos5MO

Yes, but how will this affect the economy? And how will the government respond to something like this?

 @9TR533Janswered…6mos6MO

Yes, but it should be strictly reserved to medicinal use and exclude all meddling in reproduction and human cloning

 @9T8X5WBfrom British Columbia  answered…6mos6MO

Only for specific diseases such as alzheimers, dementia, etc. i would not support funding research into getting rid of people with autism or down syndrome.

 @9PLH7DZPeople’sfrom Ontario  answered…9mos9MO

Yes, but only if The research organization takes the best interests of the country into account And is unbiased

 @B2C3XPJfrom Alberta  answered…2mos2MO

I beleive we should look into prevention of diesese and treatments involved in that but not so much genetic engineering.

 @B2BM93Xfrom Ontario  answered…2mos2MO

yeah but private companies should do it themselves. The U.S.A. has the best record for eradicating diseases because they have the private money to do so.

 @B23K9GGfrom Ontario  answered…3mos3MO

It depends on the circumstances and their should people ensuring everyone is making good decisions and not starting new problems

 @B23DHJVanswered…3mos3MO

Yes But But Only If The Results From The Genetic Engineering Research Are For Everyone To Equally Access Regardless Of Income Level

 @9YJQM5LNew Democraticfrom Ontario  answered…4mos4MO

as long as they can be held accountable with fail safes put into place as it is a slippery slope into eugenics territory

 @9TV8XFSfrom British Columbia  answered…6mos6MO

Yes, we should fund more research. But the government should watch over the research. To ensure it is happening ethically

 @9TT85JLfrom Saskatchewan  answered…6mos6MO

This question is vague. Genetic engineering for disease prevention and treatment is different in terms of whether it’s done on humans, crops or food.

 @9RC2QHKNew Democraticfrom Nova Scotia  answered…8mos8MO

Yes, Excepting that our government correctly uses peer reviewed research that identifies diseases and the likes.

 @9P965MFConservativefrom Ontario  answered…9mos9MO

I believe it is important, however, there are other pressing matters that I think the government should invest more money in.

 @ISIDEWITHasked…6mos6MO

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

 @ISIDEWITHasked…6mos6MO

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

 @ISIDEWITHasked…6mos6MO

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?

 @ISIDEWITHasked…6mos6MO

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

 @ISIDEWITHasked…6mos6MO

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

 @ISIDEWITHasked…6mos6MO

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

 @B39TY8Hfrom Nova Scotia  answered…2wks2W

This should be a part of the healthcare budget. Private companies should be allowed to do this as well

 @B3MHVY7from Ontario  answered…4 days4D

No, we cannot afford to direct our funding to such an expensive project exspecially due to the fact that this is new and would take a long time and a lot of money that could be used for anything along the lines of community buildings and schools and hospitals where needed.

 @ISIDEWITHasked…6mos6MO

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

 @B3FWKNXfrom Alberta  answered…1wk1W

Yes but there have to be strict regulations to ensure that genetic engineering is ethical and won't be used to intentionally harm groups of people or generations

 @ISIDEWITHasked…6mos6MO

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

 @ISIDEWITHasked…6mos6MO

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

 @ISIDEWITHasked…6mos6MO

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

Demographics

Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion

Loading data...