Team:NUS Singapore-Sci/Cas Asks
CasAsks
In #CasAsks, we aim to set the groundwork for our project by collating perceptions and misconceptions from the various stakeholders, such as the general public of Singapore and experts in the scientific field. Such insights were crucial in shaping the direction of our project this year, where we decided to focus on RNA editing since it has potentially lesser ethical concerns compared to “permanent edits” in DNA.
We took a bottom-up approach in our survey process, starting from collecting survey data from individuals of different walks of life about genetic engineering. There is a need for the public to understand the implications of genome editing as they will be the eventual consumers of the technology. From our survey analysis, we surfaced knowledge gaps, uncovered misconceptions and had a better understanding of the public’s degree of acceptance towards genome editing techniques.
Then, we collated opinions from scientists and bio-ethicists and consulted board-members from our local bioethics regulator, Bioethics Advisory Committee on the potential use of genome editing for a variety of applications and what the technology can do or cannot do. After hearing from the public, we transmitted some of their voices/concerns to the professionals. We aim to facilitate the communication of genome editing between the science experts and the general public using our sets of video. The experts were posed a series of questions regarding the science of genome editing and its potential ethical issues. Their valuable input were then channelled into the development of #CasTalks, an online media channel to educate the public about misconceptions of genome editing.
We took a bottom-up approach in our survey process, starting from collecting survey data from individuals of different walks of life about genetic engineering. There is a need for the public to understand the implications of genome editing as they will be the eventual consumers of the technology. From our survey analysis, we surfaced knowledge gaps, uncovered misconceptions and had a better understanding of the public’s degree of acceptance towards genome editing techniques.
Then, we collated opinions from scientists and bio-ethicists and consulted board-members from our local bioethics regulator, Bioethics Advisory Committee on the potential use of genome editing for a variety of applications and what the technology can do or cannot do. After hearing from the public, we transmitted some of their voices/concerns to the professionals. We aim to facilitate the communication of genome editing between the science experts and the general public using our sets of video. The experts were posed a series of questions regarding the science of genome editing and its potential ethical issues. Their valuable input were then channelled into the development of #CasTalks, an online media channel to educate the public about misconceptions of genome editing.