| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Trends |
Public Opinion About Stem Cell Research and Human Cloning
Matthew C. Nisbet is an assistant professor in the School of Communication at The Ohio State University. Address correspondence to the author; e-mail: nisbet.4{at}osu.edu.
Few science and technology–related issues have sparked as much survey attention as the public controversy over human embryonic stem cell research and therapeutic cloning. Interest groups, advocates, and policymakers on both sides of the debate have taken advantage of poll results to support their claims that the public backs their preferred policy outcomes, and the competing camps have staged ongoing public communication campaigns in an effort to shape public opinion. Journalists have also highlighted the results of these surveys, using poll figures to complement their coverage of who is ahead and who is behind in the competition to decide stem cell–and cloning-related policy (Nisbet, Brossard, and Kroepsch 2003).
The study of survey trends detailing public responses to genetic engineering and biotechnology is not new. For example, Singer, Corning, and Lamias (1998) reviewed poll trends specific to genetic testing, gene therapy, and early public reactions to animal and human reproductive cloning. Shanahan, Scheufele, and Lee (2001) examined trends related to agricultural biotechnology, and the National Science Foundation’s Science and Engineering Indicators surveys have tracked public opinion about genetic engineering (broadly defined) since the 1980s (for an overview, see Miller and Kimmel 2001). These previous analyses, however, have not focused specifically on surveys measuring public reactions either to stem cell or therapeutic cloning research.
 |
Background |
|---|
"Stem cells" are utility and repair units of the body that serve a central function in the maintenance and regeneration of organs and tissues throughout life. Adult stem cells, derived mostly from bone marrow and umbilical cord blood, have been used in research since the 1960s, with applications focused primarily on treatments for cancer. Stem cells from human embryos were not isolated for the first time until 1998. Unlike their adult tissue counterparts, embryonic stem cells are "undifferentiated," meaning these repair units of the human body have yet to be programmed to be specific to the brain, the skin, the heart, the lungs, or other bodily tissues. Research on embryonic stem cells is therefore considered by many scientists to be instrumental in developing a diverse supply of tissues to be used in the treatment of a variety of health problems including AIDS, diabetes, Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s, spinal cord injuries, and heart disease (Johnson 2001).
The prized potential of embryonic stem cells has led to urgent pleas from the scientific community and research advocates for U.S. government funding. Scientists argue that they have been prevented from making significant advances in the treatment of health problems because of a long-standing moratorium on using cells from human embryos in federally funded projects, limiting work to private and for-profit ventures (Rowley et al. 2002). Opponents of research counter that the derivation of stem cells from human embryos requires the embryos’ destruction, and therefore it would be morally wrong for the government to support the research (National Bioethics Advisory Committee [NBAC] 1999).
In July and August 2001 the controversy over human embryonic stem cell research reached the top of the U.S. political agenda. On August 9, President George W. Bush, in his first nationally televised address, announced a compromise solution that would limit federal funding to research that used only existing stem cell lines. As outlined by the Bush decision, funding could only move forward if it meant that new human embryos would not be destroyed. Despite pressing domestic and international political concerns, the issue remained on the political agenda in late 2001 as pro-research advocates contested the suitability of the allocated stem cell lines and as the controversy moved into a new stage when it was linked to the unresolved matter of human cloning regulation.
The beginning of the redefinition of the stem cell issue went relatively unnoticed in July 2001 as the House passed a ban (pending Senate approval) of both reproductive and therapeutic cloning (Weiss and Elperin 2001). The latter procedure was closely linked to stem cell research, as one of its central applications involves the creation of cloned embryos for use in the extraction of stem cells. Despite decisive House approval of a comprehensive ban on cloning, to date there has been little or no movement on legislation in the Senate, as neither side appears to have the votes needed for passage (Dewar 2002). One bipartisan coalition of senators has proposed legislation that would ban reproductive cloning but would allow therapeutic cloning. Another bipartisan coalition of senators has proposed a total ban similar to the House legislation (Weiss 2002). Policy conflict has not been limited to the federal level, as legislation related to stem cell research and/or cloning has been passed in more than a dozen states (Stolberg 2002). As the policy deadlock continues, the issue has been accompanied by a sizable amount of sensationalism. In one leading example, the year 2002 ended with a clone hoax perpetrated by Clonaid, a company affiliated with the Raëlian religion (Grady and Pear 2002). In addition, press reports have chronicled a handful of maverick fertility scientists and doctors who claim to be making progress toward the birth of a human clone (Nerlich and Clarke 2003).
|
Public Attention to Stem Cell Research |
|---|
 TOPBackground Public Attention to Stem... Public Understanding of Research...Moral Dimensions of Embryonic...Reproductive and Therapeutic...ConclusionAppendixPublic Attention to Stem...Public Understanding of Research...Moral Dimensions of Embryonic...Reproductive and Therapeutic...References |
|---|
Given that significant media attention to the stem cell issue did not occur until the summer of 2001 (Nisbet 2003; Nisbet, Brossard, and Kroepsch 2003), it is not surprising that when surveyed in the fall of 2000, only 20 percent of Americans reported following the issue either "very closely" or "fairly closely." Even in early July 2001, only a month before Bush’s nationally televised address, the proportion of Americans following the issue had only increased to 38 percent. By early August, however, this number had risen to slightly more than a majority of respondents, and polls indicate that in the days after Bush’s announcement, between 40 percent and 60 percent of respondents reported that they were following the issue at least somewhat closely. Public attention to the issue remained steady even several weeks after the terrorist attacks of September 11 (table 1).
In an alternative measure of public awareness, 25 percent of Americans reported that they had either seen, read, or heard "a lot" about the issue in the weeks immediately following the Bush decision (table 2). A few months later, in February 2002, this figure remained relatively stable at 27 percent, though a precise trend is difficult to observe because of slightly different question wording. However, in September 2002, a little more than a year after Bush’s decision, only 13 percent of respondents reported having seen, read, or heard "a lot" about the issue, whereas 46 percent of respondents reported "not much" or "nothing at all." These percentages suggest that overall public attention to the issue had declined from 2001 levels, with this drop in public attention paralleling a drop in media attention.
In terms of issue importance, in the summer of 2001 during the peak of the debate, more than 60 percent of respondents reported that the issue was either "very important" or "somewhat important" to them (table 3). Indeed, roughly a third of Americans reported that they had tuned in for Bush’s August 9 televised address (table 4). Bush’s televised speech and the sizable audience should not be overlooked in terms of its potential significance for public understanding of the issue. At least one historian viewed Bush’s speech as remarkable for a presidential address since Bush spent an unusual amount of time outlining the background of the issue and the competing points of view that fueled the controversy (Cmiel 2001).
Relative to indicators of public attention to the issue of cloning, the available survey data is fairly nonspecific to therapeutic cloning applications; instead, survey items tracked public attention to reproductive cloning starting with the 1997 announcement of the cloned sheep named Dolly. Through the end of 1998, roughly half of respondents reported following developments related to cloning or having an interest in the issue, with the exception of the announcement of cloned mice by scientists in Hawaii. However, despite the sensationalism surrounding the human cloning claims announced by the Raëlians during Christmas week of 2002, less than half of respondents reported that they were following the issue either "very closely," or "fairly closely." (table 5)1
|
Public Understanding of Research and Regulation |
|---|
|
TOPBackgroundPublic Attention to Stem...Public Understanding of Research...Moral Dimensions of Embryonic...Reproductive and Therapeutic...ConclusionAppendixPublic Attention to Stem...Public Understanding of Research...Moral Dimensions of Embryonic...Reproductive and Therapeutic...References |
|---|
In the early stages of the controversy, given the low levels of media attention to the issue, the public should not be faulted for a lack of knowledge relative to the specifics of the emerging policy debate. For example, when asked in the fall of 2000, only 17 percent of respondents reported that they knew that the National Institutes of Health (NIH) had recently announced that the agency would begin accepting applications for federal funding of embryonic stem cell research, and close to two-thirds of respondents either reported "don’t know" or refused the question (table 6). (George W. Bush put the NIH decision on hold shortly after taking office in early 2001.)
Yet by August 2001, despite considerable media coverage and despite an increase in self-reported attention to the issue, the public still scored relatively low in terms of knowledge. For example, although in one August 10–12 poll, 60 percent of respondents reported having a "good understanding" of the issue (table 7), a few weeks later only 28 percent of respondents could correctly identify the criteria under which Bush’s decision would allow a stem cell line to be eligible for funding (table 8). A majority of respondents, however, were at least familiar with the crux of the debate, naming the destruction of human embryos as the major reason for the controversy (table 9). However, a year later, in September 2002, when asked in an open-ended question to answer what kinds of stem cells came to mind when thinking about stem cell therapy, more than half answered "don’t know," and only 17 percent answered embryonic stem cells (table 10).
Specific to public knowledge of cloning, the available survey items are somewhat limited. As early as 1986, 69 percent of the public indicated that they understood the meaning of the term "cloning." However, the recent debate whether to ban all forms of cloning, or to allow cloning only for medical research purposes appears to have complicated matters for the public. In 2002, for example, a VCU Life Sciences survey indicated that only 41 percent of respondents reported they were either "very clear" or "somewhat clear" on the differences between "reproductive" and "therapeutic" cloning procedures. In terms of knowledge of cloning policy, as of October 2002, according to a survey conducted by The Genetics and Public Policy Center, more than half of respondents incorrectly assumed that the government already regulated the cloning of humans.
|
Moral Dimensions of Embryonic Stem Cell Research |
|---|
|
TOPBackgroundPublic Attention to Stem...Public Understanding of Research...Moral Dimensions of Embryonic...Reproductive and Therapeutic...ConclusionAppendixPublic Attention to Stem...Public Understanding of Research...Moral Dimensions of Embryonic...Reproductive and Therapeutic...References |
|---|
As previously mentioned, much of the opposition to embryonic stem cell research from religious and conservative elites derives from the necessary destruction of human embryos. At the base of this elite opposition are the beliefs that a human embryo is equivalent to a human life and that embryos are deserving of the same protections as other human beings. To destroy embryos would therefore be morally wrong, essentially equivalent to murder (NBAC 1999). Where does the public weigh in on this matter? Previous surveys that have asked Americans about when life begins indicate that a slight majority of respondents have consistently indicated that life begins at "conception" (table 11).
Important to note is a recent 2003 Newsweek poll (table 12). This is the lone poll to explore more carefully the public’s definition of "conception," distinguishing in response categories between a fertilized egg and an embryo. Given this additional precision in measurement, the important implication for embryonic stem cell research is that a combined 58 percent of the public appears to believe that life begins either at the earliest stage of a fertilized egg or as an embryo.
Given this outlook on when life begins, it would not be surprising to find that embryonic stem cell research might be morally problematic for many respondents. In July 2001, 54 percent of respondents agreed that embryonic stem cell research was morally wrong, but among those same respondents an ambivalent majority said that although the research may be morally wrong, it might also still be necessary. As of early August 2001, this finding remained virtually unchanged, but by May 2002, and later in May 2003, the percentage regarding embryonic stem cell research as morally wrong was 39 percent and 38 percent, respectively (tables 13a, 13b).
There is also evidence that the type of embryo used in research matters to respondents (tables 14a, 14b). The first poll listed in table 14a asked specifically about research using stem cells obtained from "extra embryos" created at fertility clinics. From June 2001 to just after the Bush decision in August 2001, polls indicate that a strong majority of Americans supported research using "extra" embryos, and this support appears to have increased slightly from June to just after the Bush decision (table 14a). Differences in question wording should be noted. Second, when the source of the embryos is left unspecified, it is apparent that public support drops, as indicated in the 2001 Virginia Commonwealth University (VCU) poll (table 14b). In this particular case only 48 percent of respondents indicated that they either "strongly favored" or "somewhat favored" the research. Importantly, when the same exact question was asked a year later in September 2002, there appears to have been a drop in public support over the twelve-month period, with only 35 percent of respondents indicating that they favored research. Yet as of September 2003, when VCU asked the same question of respondents again, support appears to have climbed back to approximately the level in 2001.
Additional evidence that opinion varies based on the type of embryo used as a source for stem cells is provided by the survey results detailed in tables 15a and 15b. In the May 2001 poll that asked about unspecified embryos (but mentioned possible medical benefits of research) (table 15a), 58 percent of respondents indicated that research should be allowed. Alternatively, the Gallup and Harris Interactive polls—conducted within days of each other in July—showed strikingly different results. In the Gallup poll, only 38 percent of respondents indicated that research should be allowed using embryos created specifically for research purposes. The Harris poll asked specifically about extra embryos left over from fertilization and found support to be much higher at 61 percent (table 15b). This suggests that public support for research depends on the type of embryo used, with generalized public support greatest for "discarded" or "extra embryos."
The importance of how prospective research is framed is illustrated by the first two polls detailed in table 16, the first sponsored by the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation (JDRF) and the second by the National Council of Catholic Bishops (NCCB). Both poll items present strong examples of just how sensitive respondents may be to question-wording effects, especially when public attention to an issue is relatively low. The JDRF poll mentions as the source of stem cells extra embryos "donated to research" and then includes as background information a list of eight high-profile diseases or injuries for which stem cell research might provide "cures." Not surprisingly, public support for funding is measured at 65 percent. In the NCCB poll, respondents are told, "Congress is considering whether to provide funding for experiments using stem cells from human embryos. The live embryos would be destroyed in their first week of development to obtain these cells." The respondents are then asked, "Do you support or favor using your federal tax dollars for such experiments?" (emphasis added). Given this information, 70 percent of respondents voiced their opposition to funding.
Across other polls taken in 2001 and featured in table 16, public support appears highest for funding of stem cell research that uses either adult cells (68 percent) or extra embryos (greater than 50 percent support across all polls). Public support for funding is lowest, by far, for stem cell research that uses cloned embryos as sources (28 percent). Important to note is that in the July 2001 Gallup poll, when respondents were prompted with the response categories "Do you think the federal government should or should not fund this type of research, or don’t you know enough to say?" more than half of the respondents chose the "don’t know enough to say" response. Considering possible changes in support for funding between 2001 and 2002, the limited number of available measures makes a determination somewhat difficult. The lone 2002 poll asking about support for funding is nonspecific to the embryo source and lacks any background information in the question. This poll registers support at 43 percent but includes a strong 18 percent "don’t know."
The surveys taken in the days and weeks after Bush’s August 9, 2001, announcement indicate that the president’s decision appears to have been received favorably by a majority of Americans, as the polls were fairly consistent in showing between 50 percent and 60 percent support (table 17). This level of support is somewhat surprising given that many scientists, pro-research advocates, and news organizations publicly questioned and criticized the suitability of the existing stem cell lines outlined by Bush.
|
Reproductive and Therapeutic Cloning |
|---|
|
TOPBackgroundPublic Attention to Stem...Public Understanding of Research...Moral Dimensions of Embryonic...Reproductive and Therapeutic...ConclusionAppendixPublic Attention to Stem...Public Understanding of Research...Moral Dimensions of Embryonic...Reproductive and Therapeutic...References |
|---|
As previously described, highly relevant to the issue of federal funding for embryonic stem cell research has been the debate over regulation of reproductive and therapeutic cloning. Public opinion is fairly clear when it comes to support for reproductive cloning. (Here, in order to categorize the questions, a strict definition of the term is adopted from the 2002 report of the President’s Council on Bioethics, with reproductive cloning, or "cloning-to-produce-children," including all cloning technology designed to ultimately result in the birth of a child, no matter the stated reason or justification for such a procedure.) As table 18 outlines, in polls taken between 1993 and 2002, roughly 75 percent or more of respondents have consistently indicated—across a wide variety of stated purposes—that they disapprove of reproductive cloning. The few exceptions include screening for abnormalities in embryos (52 percent disapproved in 1993), cloning of embryos for infertility treatment (63 percent disapproved in 1998), and cloning to produce copies of humans for organs to save others (68 percent disapproved in 2001). Still, in all of these examples, a majority of Americans disapprove of the procedure.
Since the Dolly announcement of early 1997, more than 80 percent of Americans have consistently answered that reproductive cloning should not be allowed or should be illegal (tables 19a, 19b), with one exception in a Beliefnet poll in August 2001, in which opposition to cloning was less.
Still, when the public was asked if they would favor or oppose either an "outright ban on the cloning of human beings" or "a law that would prohibit the cloning of human beings," subtle differences appeared (tables 20a, 20b). In this case, starting in early 1998 and into the spring of 2002, only a slight majority of Americans favored either an outright ban or a law that would prohibit cloning, suggesting that the public may be somewhat hesitant about backing legislation that completely closes the door on any and all cloning-related research. In fact, when Gallup asked in March 2003, "would you favor or oppose a law that would prohibit the cloning of human beings, or are you unsure?" (emphasis added), a quarter of respondents answered that they were not entirely certain about the matter (table 20b).
In contrast, however, a slight majority of Americans approve of cloning that is not designed specifically to result in the birth of a human, but is designed to aid in medical research into the treatment of diseases or for the purposes of cloning organs and adult cells (table 21). This slight majority support remains steady between late 2001 through September 2002. The public, however, appears to assert reservations when asked specifically about the cloning of embryos for medical research, with majorities voicing their disapproval in May and September 2002. Additionally, when asked specifically in early 2003 about legislation that would allow cloning for "laboratory research" but would ban reproductive cloning, a little more than a third of respondents indicated support for only a partial ban, whereas 40–60 percent of respondents indicated their support for a total ban (table 22).
|
Conclusion |
|---|
The controversy over human embryonic stem cell research and therapeutic cloning remains unresolved, and the issue may mark a new era of divisive and deadlocked "biopolitics." What the review of the polls makes clear is that public attention was captured by this emerging conflict during the summer of 2001 but has waned since, as media coverage has subsided, and many other competing issues have come to dominate the political and media agenda. Despite Americans’ elevated attention to the issue in 2001, however, it appears that the public remains in the dark about the science and the policy driving the controversy. Despite limited knowledge about the specifics of the issue, the public appears to have strong reservations about research that destroys embryos, preferring that if the research must move forward, scientists make use of either extra embryos left over from in vitro clinics, or adult cells. Additionally, evidence indicates that question wording in surveys can have strong effects on the public’s stated response to these volatile issues. On the matter of cloning, the public is strongly opposed to reproductive cloning, but resolve softens when it comes to medical applications, with about a third of Americans supporting this research, while a substantial proportion of Americans remain unsure about the matter. In all, the analysis points to an important role for the media in shaping future public judgments of stem cell research and human cloning. Evidence of strong question wording effects, combined with the findings relative to low levels of public knowledge, suggest that the public may be highly susceptible to influence by changes in media attention and media characterization of the issue.
|
Appendix |
|---|
Data Sources and Abbreviations
Many of the survey questions and results cited in this report were located using the public opinion online search engine ("Polls and Surveys") of Lexis-Nexis and the Kaiser Health Poll Archive, both provided by the Roper Center for Public Opinion. Keywords such as "stem cell," "cloning," "clone," or "conception," or "life begin" were used for the search. Further polls were retrieved from the data archives of "pollingreport.com" or through a Web search. Most of the surveys cited are based on national adult samples with sample size of approximately one thousand or more, with exceptions noted. The questions cited were drawn from surveys conducted by the following survey organizations, news organizations, policy centers, or advocacy groups:
ABC: ABC News
ABC/Post: ABC News with Washington Post
Alliance for Aging Research: Survey conducted by Belden, Russonello, and Stewart.
Beliefnet: Beliefnet with ABC News
Center: The Genetics and Public Policy Center, Washington, DC. The center is part of the Phoebe R. Berman Bioethics Institute at Johns Hopkins University and is funded by the Pew Charitable Trusts. The survey was conducted by Princeton Data Source, LLC.
Gallup: Gallup Organization with CNN and USA Today
Harris: Louis Harris and Associates
HarrisIT: Harris Interactive
Ipsos: Ipsos-Reid
JDRF: Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation. Survey conducted by Opinion Research Corporation International.
Kaiser: Henry J. Kaiser Foundation, Harvard School of Public Health. Survey conducted by Princeton Survey Research Associates.
LA Times: Los Angeles Times
NBC/WSJ: NBC News with Wall Street Journal. Survey conducted by Hart and Tecter Research Companies.
NCCB: National Council of Catholic Bishops. Survey conducted by International Communications Research.
Newsweek: Newsweek magazine. Survey conducted by Princeton Survey Research Associates.
PewPress: Pew Research Center for the People and the Press. Survey conducted by Princeton Survey Research Associates.
PewRel: Pew Research Center, Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life. Survey conducted by Princeton Survey Research Associates.
Roper: Roper Organization
VCU: Virgina Commonwealth University Life Sciences Survey. Survey conducted by VCU Center for Public Policy.
Yank.: Yankelovich Partners Poll Inc.
|
Public Attention to Stem Cell Research |
|---|
|
TOPBackgroundPublic Attention to Stem...Public Understanding of Research...Moral Dimensions of Embryonic...Reproductive and Therapeutic...ConclusionAppendixPublic Attention to Stem...Public Understanding of Research...Moral Dimensions of Embryonic...Reproductive and Therapeutic...References |
|---|
1. I’m going to read you a list of some stories covered by news organizations in the last month or so. As I read each one, tell me if you happened to follow this news story very closely, fairly closely, not too closely, or not at all closely. How closely did you follow this story? . . . Government decision about the use of federal funding for stem cell research.
|
NOTE.—* = less than .5 percent; NA = not asked
a As you may know, the federal government is considering whether to fund certain kinds of medical research known as "stem cell research." . . . How closely have you followed the debate about government funding of stem cell research—very closely, somewhat closely, not too closely, or not closely at all?
b How closely have you followed the issue of federal funding of stem cell research? Have you followed this issue extremely closely, somewhat closely, only a little, or not at all? If you have never heard of stem cell research, please just say so.
c Now I’m going to read you a list of some stories covered by news organizations in the last month or so. As I read each one, tell me if you happened to follow this news story very closely, fairly closely, not too closely, or not at all closely. How closely did you follow this story? . . . The discussion of stem cell lines eligible for research with federal funding.
2. How much have you seen, read, or heard about medical research involving embryonic stem cells—a lot, a little, not much, or nothing at all?
|
a As you may know, the federal government has debated whether to fund certain kinds of medical research known as "stem cell research." How much have you heard about this? A lot, a little, or nothing at all?
3. As you may know, the federal government is considering whether to fund certain kinds of medical research known as "stem cell research." . . . How important is the issue of stem cell research to you—very important, somewhat important, not too important, or not at all important?
|
4. As you may know, President (George W.) Bush gave a speech tonight (August 9, 2001) on stem cell research, and he announced that he would allow the government to fund research using stem cells that have been created in the past in a process that destroyed human embryos. The government will not fund stem cell research that would destroy additional embryos in the future . . . Did you happen to watch any of Bush’s speech on stem cell research tonight, or not?
|
a As you may know, President [George W.] Bush gave a speech Thursday night [August 9, 2001] on stem cell research, and he announced that he would allow the government to fund research using stem cells that have been created in the past in a process that destroyed human embryos. The government will not fund stem cell research that would destroy additional embryos in the future . . . Did you happen to watch any of Bush’s speech on stem cell research Thursday night, or not?
5. I will read a list of some stories covered by news organizations in the past month. As I read each item, tell me if you happened to follow this news story very closely, fairly closely, not too closely, or not at all closely? . . . The cloning of a sheep by a Scottish biologist.
|
a I will read a list of some stories covered by news organizations this past month. As I read each item, tell me if you happened to follow this news story very closely, fairly closely, not too closely, or not at all closely . . . Plans by a Chicago scientist [Richard Seed] to open a clinic for cloning people.
b I will read a list of some stories covered by news organizations this past month. As I read each item, tell me if you happened to follow this news story very closely, fairly closely, not too closely, or not at all closely . . . The cloning of mice by scientists in Hawaii.
c Now I will read a list of some stories covered by news organizations this past month. As I read each item, tell me if you happened to follow this news story very closely, fairly closely, not too closely, or not at all closely? . . . A religious group [Raëlians] claiming to have successfully cloned a human being.
|
Public Understanding of Research and Regulation |
|---|
|
TOPBackgroundPublic Attention to Stem...Public Understanding of Research...Moral Dimensions of Embryonic...Reproductive and Therapeutic...ConclusionAppendixPublic Attention to Stem...Public Understanding of Research...Moral Dimensions of Embryonic...Reproductive and Therapeutic...References |
|---|
6. I have a few more questions about some of the news stories that I just mentioned. If you’re not sure of an answer, that’s okay. Just tell me and I’ll go to the next question. . . . As you may know the government recently made a decision about the use of federal funds to do research on stem cells that come from very early human embryos. From what you’ve seen or heard in the news, did they decide to . . . allow scientists to use federal funds for this type of research or continue to ban the use of federal funds for this type of research?
|
7. Do you personally feel that you have a good basic understanding of the stem cell issue, or don’t you know that much about it?
|
8. Now, I have a few more questions about some of the news stories that I just mentioned. If you’re not sure of an answer, that’s okay. Just tell me and I’ll go to the next question. . . . You may have seen or heard news reports about the National Institutes of Health releasing a list of stem cell lines eligible for research with federal funding. As far as you know, under President [George W.] Bush’s current policy, will stem cell lines developed in the future be eligible for federal funding for research if they meet certain criteria, or will only those named recently be eligible for federal funding?
|
9. I have a few more questions about some of the news stories that I just mentioned. If you’re not sure of an answer, that’s okay. Just tell me and I’ll go to the next question. . . . You may have seen or heard news reports about the controversy involving federal funding of stem cell research. From what you may have seen or heard in the news, what is the major reason for this controversy? . . . Human embryos are destroyed in the research process; stem cell research is potentially dangerous to the adult subjects who participate in the research trials; there is not enough money in the federal budget to fund stem cell research.
|
10. There is a new branch of medicine that uses stem cell therapy to develop new treatments for disease. There are several different kinds of stem cells. What kind of stem cells come to your mind when you think about stem cell therapy?
|
NOTE.—VCU coded open-ended responses into categories.
|
Moral Dimensions of Embryonic Stem Cell Research |
|---|
|
TOPBackgroundPublic Attention to Stem...Public Understanding of Research...Moral Dimensions of Embryonic...Reproductive and Therapeutic...ConclusionAppendixPublic Attention to Stem...Public Understanding of Research...Moral Dimensions of Embryonic...Reproductive and Therapeutic...References |
|---|
11. Some people feel that human life begins at the moment of conception. Others feel that human life does not begin until the baby is actually born. Do you, yourself, feel that human life begins at conception, at the time of birth, or at some point in between?
|
NOTE.—NA = not asked.
a There is a good deal of discussion these days on when human life begins and ends. Is it your view that life begins at conception or that life begins at birth? Those respondents indicating "somewhere in between" volunteered that specific response.
b Do you believe that life begins at conception, or at birth, or somewhere in between, or haven’t you heard enough about that yet to say?
c Nationwide sample of 2,406 adults, plus an oversample of 1,177 women. Men and women were weighted to their proper proportion in the population.
d Do you believe that life begins at conception, or at birth, or somewhere in between?
12. In your opinion, when does human life begin . . . when a man’s sperm fertilizes a woman’s egg, when an embryo is implanted in a woman’s uterus, when a fetus is viable—that is, is able to survive outside the womb, or at birth?
|
13a. The kind of stem cell research the government is considering involves human embryos that have been created in medical clinics by fertilizing a woman’s egg outside the womb. An embryo may be implanted into a woman’s womb to develop into a baby. If an embryo is not implanted into a woman’s womb to develop into a baby, it may be destroyed, either by being discarded or by being used for medical research. Some scientists believe this type of medical research could lead to treatments for such diseases as Alzheimer’s, diabetes, heart disease, and spinal cord injuries. . . . Which comes closest to your view of this kind of stem cell research: it is morally wrong and is unnecessary, it is morally wrong but may be necessary, it is not morally wrong and may be necessary, or it is not morally wrong but is unnecessary?
|
NOTE.—NA = not asked.
a I would like to ask about a specific type of research on stem cells developed from human embryos that have been created outside a woman’s womb. This kind of stem cell research destroys the embryos but may help find treatments for major diseases. As you may know, fertility clinics increase a woman’s chance to have a child by fertilizing several embryos, but only a few are implanted in her womb to enable her to have a baby. Some stem cells are developed from the remaining embryos that the fertility clinics usually discard. Which comes closest to your view of this kind of stem cell research—it is morally wrong and is unnecessary; it is morally wrong but may be necessary, it is not morally wrong and may be necessary, or it is not morally wrong but is unnecessary?
13b. Next, I’m going to read you a list of issues. Regardless of whether or not you think it should be legal, for each one, please tell me whether you personally believe that in general it is morally acceptable or morally wrong. How about . . . medical research using stem cells obtained from human embryos?
|
NOTE.—NA = not asked.
14a. Sometimes fertility clinics produce extra fertilized eggs, also called embryos, that are not implanted in a woman’s womb. These extra embryos either are discarded, or couples can donate them for use in medical research called stem cell research. Some people support stem cell research, saying it’s an important way to find treatments for many diseases. Other people oppose stem cell research, saying it’s wrong to use any human embryos for research purposes. What about you? Do you support or oppose stem cell research?
|
NOTE.—NA = not asked.
a Sometimes fertility clinics produce extra fertilized eggs, also called embryos, that are not implanted in a woman’s womb. These extra embryos either are discarded, or couples can donate them for use in medical research called stem cell research. Some people support stem cell research, saying it’s an important way to find treatments for many diseases. Other people oppose stem cell research, saying it’s wrong to use any human embryos for research purposes. What about you? Do you support or oppose stem cell research?
b As you may know, this kind of so-called stem cell research is being used by scientists trying to find cures for diseases such as Alzheimer’s disease, Parkinson’s disease, or diabetes. It involves using destroyed embryos discarded from fertility clinics that no longer need them. Do you favor or oppose using discarded embryos to conduct stem cell research to try to find cures for diseases such as those I mentioned?
14b. On the whole, how much do you favor or oppose medical research that uses stem cells from human embryos—do you strongly favor, somewhat favor, somewhat oppose, or strongly oppose this?
|
15a. Please tell me if you agree with each of the following statements strongly or somewhat? . . . Scientists should be able to use stem cells obtained from very early human embryos to find cures for serious diseases such as Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s? Strongly agree, somewhat agree, somewhat disagree, strongly disagree, don’t know/refused.
|
15b. One of the issues involved in this type of research is whether or not the embryos used were developed specifically for stem cell research. Do you think the federal government should or should not allow scientists to fertilize human eggs specifically for the purpose of creating stem cells? Yes, should allow; no, should not allow; no opinion.
|
a Stem cells come from embryos left over from in vitro fertilization, which are not used and are normally destroyed. Many medical researchers want to use them to develop treatments, or to prevent diseases, such as diabetes, Alzheimers’s, or Parkinson’s disease. On balance, do you think this research should or should not be allowed?
16. As you may already know, a stem cell is the basic cell in the body from which all other cells arise. Medical researchers have been able to isolate stem cells from excess human embryos developed through in vitro fertilization and fetal tissue that has been donated to research. The medical researchers believe that human stem cells can be developed as replacement cells to cure diseases such as diabetes, Parkinson’s, Alzheimer’s, cancer, heart disease, arthritis, burns, or spinal cord problems. Do you favor the funding of stem cell research by the National Institutes of Health?
|
NOTE.—NA = not asked.
a Stem cells are the basic cells from which all of a person’s tissues and organs develop. Congress is considering whether to provide funding for experiments using stem cells from human embryos. The live embryos would be destroyed in their first week of development to obtain these cells. Do you support or oppose using your federal tax dollars for such experiments?
b The federal government supports funding for a variety of medical research. Do you think federal funding for medical research should or should not provide funding for stem cell research?
c As you may know, the federal government is considering whether to fund certain kinds of medical research known as "stem cell research." . . . . . . Do you think the federal government should or should not fund this type of research, or don’t you know enough to say?
d The kind of stem cell research the government is considering involves human embryos that have been created in medical clinics by fertilizing a woman’s egg outside the womb. An embryo may be implanted into a woman’s womb to develop into a baby. If an embryo is not implanted into a woman’s womb to develop into a baby, it may be destroyed, either by being discarded or by being used for medical research. Some scientists believe this type of medical research could lead to treatments for such diseases as Alzheimer’s, diabetes, heart disease and spinal cord injuries. . . . Giventhis information, do you think the federal government should or should not fund this type of research?
e Based on what you have read or heard, do you think that the federal government should or should not fund stem cell research?
f The federal government provides funding to support a variety of medical research. Do you think federal funding for medical research should or should not include funding for stem cell research?
g As you may know, the federal government is considering whether to fund certain kinds of medical research known as "stem cell research." . . . Do you think the federal government should or should not fund this type of research?
h I would like to ask about a few specific types of research on stem cells developed from human embryos that have been created outside a woman’s womb. This kind of stem cell research destroys the embryos but may help find treatments for major diseases. . . . As you may know, fertility clinics increase a woman’s chance to have a child by fertilizing several embryos, but only a few are implanted in her womb to enable her to have a baby. Some stem cells are developed from the remaining embryos that the fertility clinics usually discard. Do you think the federal government should or should not fund research on stem cells from this kind of embryo?
i Some stem cells may be developed from embryos produced by cloning cells from a living human being rather than by fertilizing a woman’s egg. Do you think the federal government should or should not fund research on stem cells from this kind of embryo?
j I would like to ask about a few specific types of research on stem cells developed from human embryos that have been created outside a woman’s womb. This kind of stem cell research destroys the embryos but may help find treatments for major diseases. . . . Some stem cells are developed from embryos that are created in laboratories specifically for the purpose of conducting this research and not to help women have a child. Do you think the federal government should or should not fund research on stem cells from this kind of embryo?
k There is another kind of research using stem cells that come just from adults and do not come from embryos at all. The research results in no injury to the person from whom the stem cells are taken. Do you think the federal government should or should not fund research on this kind of stem cells?
l Do you think the federal government should or should not fund stem cell research?
17. As you may know, President [George W.] Bush gave a speech tonight [August 9, 2001] on stem cell research, and he announced that he would allow the government to fund research using stem cells that have been created in the past in a process that destroyed human embryos. The government will not fund stem cell research that would destroy additional embryos in the future. . . . Overall, do you approve or disapprove of Bush’s decision on stem cell research?
|
a George W. Bush has said he will allow limited federal funding for research on stem cells taken from human embryos. Given what you know about the issue, do you approve or disapprove of Bush’s decision to allow limited federal funding for embryonic stem cell research?
b As you may know, President [George W.] Bush gave a speech Thursday night [August 9, 2001] on stem cell research, and he announced that he would allow the government to fund research using stem cells that have been created in the past in a process that destroyed human embryos. The government will not fund stem cell research that would destroy additional embryos in the future. . . . Overall, do you approve or disapprove of Bush’s decision on stem cell research?
c President [George W.] Bush announced that federal funding would be allowed only for research using embryos that have already been destroyed. Scientists can continue to grow and harvest stem cells from those experiments already under way. President Bush also announced that no more embryos could ever be destroyed for future research that uses federal funds. Do you approve or disapprove of President Bush’s decision to allow federal funding of stem cell research already under way using destroyed embryos, but banning any further destruction of embryos for future stem cell research?
|
Reproductive and Therapeutic Cloning |
|---|
|
TOPBackgroundPublic Attention to Stem...Public Understanding of Research...Moral Dimensions of Embryonic...Reproductive and Therapeutic...ConclusionAppendixPublic Attention to Stem...Public Understanding of Research...Moral Dimensions of Embryonic...Reproductive and Therapeutic...References |
|---|
18. Now here are a few questions about a different topic—a process called cloning. As you may have read or heard, medical researchers are on the verge of discovering a way to create new embryos, called clones, from a fertile egg. The original embryo and its clones can grow into babies that are identical copies of each other. A cloned embryo can be frozen and put into a mother’s womb for development at any time. Do you approve or disapprove of the use of cloning for each of the following purposes? . . . To make it possible for societies to clone and reproduce large numbers of individuals with genetically desirable traits?
|