CRISPR is a powerful tool for editing genomes, allowing for precise modifications to DNA that allows scientists to better understand gene functions, model diseases more accurately, and develop innovative treatments. Proponents argue that regulation ensures safe and ethical use of the technology. Opponents argue that too much regulation could stifle innovation and scientific progress.
Narrow down the conversation to these participants:
Province/Territory:
@9MP7X29Conservative6mos6MO
No, adding chemicals to children to make them "better", as well as the possible mistakes, makes me completely disagree with the regulation.
@9MP6SK26mos6MO
up to the people if they want to change there kids and not others
@9MP6H7P6mos6MO
I think that's weird and shouldn't be allowed unless it's used to prevent illness or something life-threatening.
@9MN6QYS6mos6MO
yes, as long as it is known and approved by the people it is going to affect
@9SNLZ3S3mos3MO
Only for the benefit of communal health for all citizens and residents if they are required to have an organ transplant or genetic modification for better quality of life or to avoid death.
@9RXS4P4 4mos4MO
i feel like more research has to be done on the long term effects, and more risks should be eliminated before the use of CRISPR technology should become regulated.
@9RJ6K3V4mos4MO
Yes, but all citizens should be ensured they have the inherent right to refuse medical treatments at all times.
@9RCBSYB4mos4MO
The government should regulate CRISPR with an eye to not regulating to the point of stifling innovation and scientific progress.
@9RBVFQQ4mos4MO
Yes, but not too much. CRISPR has the potential to be transformative for the entirety of the human race and should be embraced as such.
@9RBPNXJ4mos4MO
They should start thinking about how to properly do this. However it's important to remember genetic diversity is ultimately humanities best chance at future survival.
@9RBNFB74mos4MO
Human genomic editing should only be done for genetic diseases or to correct epigenetic markers affecting the health of the individual, not affecting gametes
@9R4Q69P4mos4MO
genetic modifications as in what? to save someone life? Or only because they want it?
@9QZTDKH4mos4MO
Yes only if the technology is proven to be safe for use, because then it would be like taking a medical surgery for a health issue.
@9QW7TQZ4mos4MO
Yes, and nationalize it to make sure it is regulated properly and consistently.
@9PGWNV45mos5MO
Yes, it should only be used to prevent disabilities.
@9P8NRFMNew Democratic 5mos5MO
Yes, as long as CRISPR technology is safe and suitable for use.
@9NLZHKS6mos6MO
if is regulated strictly and used for those who need it like people with immunity problems and not the highest bidder
@9NJMFYZ6mos6MO
I agree with the idea of genetically modifying people but private companies should be in control of that because the government will just millitarize it
Yes, but only after the CRISPR technology is suitable for use.
@9NJKGTB6mos6MO
There should be no gender reassignment surgeries allowed
@9MXNDX36mos6MO
Maybe to fix any diseases or genetic differences and maybe to prevent disease from occurring in the human body but not to change a person.
@9FGSKLL 6mos6MO
Yes, but only moderate regulation so that a corporate monopoly can not happen
@9MSXW7RNew Democratic6mos6MO
No, further studies and information to public needs to be released.
@ISIDEWITH2mos2MO
@ISIDEWITH2mos2MO
@ISIDEWITH2mos2MO
@ISIDEWITH2mos2MO
@ISIDEWITH2mos2MO
@ISIDEWITH2mos2MO
@ISIDEWITH2mos2MO
@ISIDEWITH2mos2MO
@ISIDEWITH2mos2MO
@ISIDEWITH2mos2MO
Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion
Loading data...
Join in on more popular conversations.