Page 52 - Breeding Edge ebook

Source: Jayson Lusk, Oklahoma State University

Note too, that the references here to Americans’ lack of knowledge about GMOs relate to transgenic cell
modifications (between separate species), which have been happening in commercial products for

decades. So, don’t look for Americans to have any vast awareness of
the new non-transgenic techniques, like gene editing, which involve
modifications strictly within a cell’s nucleus.

Nonetheless, when people see potential or assured benefits from
biotech for their own bodies, they become more accommodating,
Scheufele and others found in their 2017 survey, which questioned
1,600 adults about new human gene editing remedies in medicine.

“We found that 59 percent of respondents expressed at least some
support for human genome editing to treat human medical
conditions or restore health,” Scheufele said. Note, however, that
only a third expressed even cautious support for such techniques
if used to enhance or improve human mental or physical abilities
or appearance.

Dietram Scheufele, Univ. of But, he said, “with CRISPR (a popular new gene editing process in
Wisconsin the laboratory), “we’re seeing some of those issues come together in

people’s minds . . . the idea of having a more technically safer and efficient solution for editing than

we’ve had in the past … and that is exciting.”

Can Scheufele’s findings in the medical sphere be equated with gene editing in agriculture?

“There are certain parallels and certain clear differences,” he said. Research shows people regard
“their own bodies much differently than they would treat production agriculture.” On the other

50 www.Agri-Pulse.com