Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Correspondence
  • Published:

Public views on gene editing and its uses


This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Relevant articles

Open Access articles citing this article.

Access options

Buy this article

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1: Would you make the same decision? Box plots of survey responses to each gene editing vignette (adult therapy, prenatal therapy, adult enhancement or prenatal enhancement).
Figure 2: National differences on “Would you make the same decision?” (n = 11,716).


  1. Baltimore, D. et al. Science 348, 36–38 (2015).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Bosley, K.S. et al. Nat. Biotechnol. 33, 478–486 (2015).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. US National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. Human Genome Editing: Science, Ethics and Governance (The National Academies Press, 2017).

  4. Fitz, N.S. et al. Neuroethics 7, 173–188 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Hainmueller, J., Hangartner, D. & Yamamoto, T. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 112, 2395–2400 (2015).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Schermer, M. Bioethics 22, 355–363 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Parens, E. Hastings Cent. Rep. 35, 34–41 (2005).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Torgersen, H. et al. in Biotechnology: the Making of a Global Controversy, (eds. Bauer, M. & Gaskell, G.) 21–94 (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 2002).

    Google Scholar 

Download references


This research was funded by the European Commission as part of the study “Neuroenhancement, responsible research and innovation” Grant Agreement No: 321464. The field work was conducted by Respondi. This study complied with the ethical regulations of the Research Ethics Committee of the London School of Economics. Data created during this research are openly available online at

Author information

Authors and Affiliations


Corresponding author

Correspondence to George Gaskell.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Supplementary information

Supplementary Note 1

Supplementary Note, Supplementary Table 1 (PDF 468 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Gaskell, G., Bard, I., Allansdottir, A. et al. Public views on gene editing and its uses. Nat Biotechnol 35, 1021–1023 (2017).

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI:

This article is cited by


Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing