- Joakim Hagelin
Synalsv 10, SE 75757 Uppsala, Sweden
Email: jh14@hotmail.com
Eubios Journal of Asian and International Bioethics 14 (2004), 214-216.
Following scientific progress in genetics in the
recent decade, there have been an increasing number of opinion polls from
commercial polling organizations about reproductive human cloning (Harris
Research 1997, Singer et al. 1998, Harris Interactive Election Survey 2000,
Carroll 2001, Time/CNN 2001, TNS Intersearch 2001, Evans 2002, Gallup 2003,
Nisbet 2004). The results of these public opinion polls unanimously suggest
that a vast majority are opposed to reproductive human cloning. Among control
variables that have been subjected to investigation; religious belief has been
found to affect opinion, in particular among them who are opposed (Singer et
al. 1998, Time/CNN 2001, TNS Intersearch 2001, Evans 2002). However, the
surveys cited either treat all religions as one group or focus on different
Christian groups. Many surveys have been conducted covering other issues
related to the advancements in genetic engineering in recent years. The
combined results of these surveys suggest that whereas the scientific
communities primarily focus on technical, research-oriented issues, the public
seems more concerned with ethics, safety and value (Hagedorn and
Allender-Hagedorn 1997). The cloning of Dolly in 1997 provoked similar
reactions; scientists extended cloning technology to other species, mostly farm
animals, whereas other stakeholders (e.g. politicians, ethicists and religious
leaders) formulated statements to condemn cloning of humans. The vast majority
of major religious groups and technologically competent countries in the world
have condemned reproductive human cloning (Reilly 2000, Nudeshima 2001, McGee
2002, Spranger 2002). Tharien (1998) suggested that although the vast majority
of interviewees from South East Asian countries were opposed to reproductive
human cloning, some expressed a more permissive view.
The aim of the present study was to elucidate whether
there was any difference in opinion about human cloning according to religious
belief. Religion, age and gender served as control variables.
Materials and methods
The non-probability sample consisted of 3503
undergraduate students of various scientific disciplines surveyed from
1999-2000 from Indonesia (n=600, surveyed in 2002), Kenya (n=384), Sweden
(n=2020) and USA (n=499). Respondents were on average 23 years old (SD=4.6),
and 58.6% were female. The age of the respondents was divided into three groups
in the analysis below (² 21 yrs, 22-25 yrs, and ³ 26 yrs). A more comprehensive
demographic description of the respondents and survey procedures was included
in Hagelin et al. (2001) and Hagelin (2004).
Questionnaires were distributed towards the end of
lectures and were voluntarily filled in anonymously and immediately after
distribution. Internal response rate varied slightly between survey items. The
numbers of Hindus, Muslims, Protestants and Roman Catholics were large enough
to allow for group wise comparisons. Other religious groups were not large
enough for statistical comparisons. The question on religiosity was a split
one, phrased "Are you an active religious person?" If "yes", the respondents
were asked to indicate whether they were Protestant, Roman Catholic, Muslim or
belonged to some other religion (i.e. an open option where respondents could indicate
their religion). Neither the intensity of religious belief, nor the level of
liberalism/traditionalism of the religious respondents was investigated
further. The proportion of respondents describing themselves as religiously
active differed between countries. A far lower proportion of the Swedish sample
indicated religiously activity compared to the other three countries
(P<0.001). The proportion of respondents belonging to different religions
differed between geographic locations. All four religions in the present
analysis were however recorded in the four regions. The vast majority of the
Swedish respondents were Protestants, whereas there were more equal proportions
of Protestants and Roman Catholics in the Kenyan and the US samples. The
Indonesian sample consisted predominantly of Hindus and Muslims. The question
on cloning was phrased "Do you have a positive or negative attitude towards
using cloning of humans in research?" Whereas phrasing generally differs in
between previous polls, similar items were used in the HTR/NBC/WSJ poll (Singer
et al. 1998, p. 662), the Harris Interactive Election 2000 survey, Carroll
(2001), the Pew poll (Evans 2002) and in a Gallup poll and the CBS poll
summarised by Nisbet (2004). Chi square analysis was performed using SAS/STAT
(SAS Institute Inc: Cary, NC, USA).
Overall, 10.4% of all respondents were positive and 73.8%
were negative to human reproductive cloning (Table 1).
A higher proportion of religious respondents were positive
to human cloning than were non-religious respondents (P<0.001). There was no
difference in proportion between religious and non-religious respondents among
those who were negative to human cloning.
Table 1. Religiosity
and opinions about reproductive human cloning. Percentages.
|
|
Positive |
Negative |
Don't know |
None |
N |
|
Hindu |
15.3 |
57.6 |
20.3 |
6.8 |
177 |
|
Muslim |
9.1 |
81.3 |
6.7 |
2.5 |
342 |
|
Protestant |
11.1 |
76.7 |
10.2 |
2.0 |
557 |
|
Roman Catholic |
18.9 |
71.4 |
8.3 |
1.4 |
217 |
|
Other religions |
15.0 |
66.3 |
16.2 |
2.5 |
80 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total average among religious respondents |
12.6 |
73.9 |
10.7 |
2.8 |
1373 |
|
Not religious respondents |
9.0 |
73.8 |
15.9 |
1.3 |
2108 |
There was no difference in opinion towards reproductive
human cloning according to age among the religious respondents. According to
gender, a lower proportion of female religious respondents accepted
reproductive human cloning compared to male religious respondents (P<0.001).
Moreover, a higher proportion of female religious respondents opposed
reproductive human cloning than male religious respondents (P<0.001).
A similar internal pattern was evident among the
non-religious respondents opinion towards reproductive human cloning according
to age and gender (accept P<0.001; and oppose P<0.001 respectively).
A higher proportion of Roman Catholic respondents were
positive to human cloning compared to other religious respondents (P<0.002).
A lower proportion of Muslim respondents were positive to human cloning
compared to other religious respondents (P<0.03). A higher proportion of
Muslim respondents were negative to human cloning compared to other religious
respondents (P<0.001). A lower proportion of Hindu respondents were negative
to human cloning than were other religious respondents (P<0.001).
The present survey focused on religious belief and
opinion about reproductive human cloning. Overall, the results suggested that
about 10% accepted and almost three out of four opposed reproductive human
cloning. These proportions are similar to the results of previous polls. The
present results further suggested that there was a slight difference in
proportions of those positive according to whether respondents considered
themselves religiously active or not. There was however no such difference
among the proportion of respondents who where negative to reproductive human
cloning. This finding disagreed with previous polls, which found that a higher
proportion of religious people opposed human cloning than did non-religious
people (Carroll 2001, TNS Intersearch, 2001). There were minor differences in
between respondents of different religions. Among religious respondents, there
was no difference in opinion according to age, and a lower proportion of female
than male respondents accepted reproductive human cloning. These findings
confirm previous results. Opinion surveys may, in general, be affected by a
number of possible sources of error related both to the survey instrument, e.g.
definitions, wording of questions, and response scales, and to the
characteristics of the sample questioned, e.g. personal interest, knowledge and
experience (Schuman and Presser 1996). Even if one may assume that the quality
of surveys is reasonably good, their results can be clearly interpreted and the
surveys are comparable, direct comparisons should always be made with caution.
It is however reasonable to assume that the respondents of the present sample
1) were younger on average and their age more homogeneous, and 2) that the
level of formal education was higher and more homogenous compared to samples of
the general public.
Although a clear majority opposed human reproductive
cloning in all four geographic regions, there were minor differences in
proportions. Lower proportions of the Kenyan and the US sub-samples were
negative compared to the Indonesian and the Swedish sub-samples. Previous polls
cited have predominantly covered the UK or the US, and it is not unlikely that
there are differences in opinion between geographical regions. In fact, higher
levels of support have been reported for a few Eastern European countries as
compared to other European countries (Gallup 2003). The results of previous
polls also indicate a slight variation in proportions of opposition between
surveys conducted within the US (Singer et al. 1998, Carroll 2001, TIME/CNN
2001, TNS Intersearch 2001, Evans 2002). There was a positive relationship
between education and opinion to human cloning in Evans (2002). However, past
research on opinions to other applications of genetic research suggest that the
impact of education on results vary between polls (Condit 2001).
In addition to religious belief, there may well be
cultural, economic, media, political, scientific, social, as well as other
factors that may influence formation of opinions towards reproductive human
cloning. The mechanisms behind the formation of opinions towards reproductive
human cloning need to be investigated in more detail in future surveys.
Furthermore, future surveys should include larger sub-samples for some
religions included in the present survey, inclusion of religious groups not
explicitly covered in the present sample, and large probability samples of
different geographical regions.
The results of the present survey indicates that
there was little difference in opinion towards reproductive human cloning
according to religious belief as well as in between respondents belonging to
different religious groups.
Acknowledgements
Participating teachers and students are acknowledged
for their kind co-operation.
Carroll, J. (2001) Americans oppose human cloning. Gallup News Service. Poll analyses. June
27.
Condit, C. (2001) What is 'public opinion' about genetics? Nature
Reviews Genetics 2: 811-815.
Evans, J.H. (2002) Religion and human cloning: an exploratory analysis
of the first available opinion data. Journal for the Scientific Study of
Religion 41: 747-758.
Gallup (2003) The acceptance of therapeutic and reproductive cloning by
the public. Public opinion survey in 30 European countries. (Wavre: EOS Gallup
Europe).
Hagedorn, C., Allender-Hagedorn, A. (1997) Issues in agricultural and
environmental biotechnology: identifying and comparing biotechnology issues
from public opinion surveys, the popular press and technical/regulatory
sources. Public Understanding of Science 6: 233-245.
Hagelin, J., et al. (2001) Religious belief and views on clinical
xenotransplantation – a survey of undergraduate students from Kenya,
Sweden and Texas. Clinical Transplantation 15: 421-425.
Hagelin, J. (2004) Opinions over the use of nonhuman primates in
research among Indonesian students. Eubios Journal of Asian and International
Bioethics 14, 95-97.
Harris Interactive Election Survey (2000) Available at: http://www.harrisinteractive.com/news/allnewsbydate.asp?NewsID=99
Harris Research (1997) The Independent. March 7.
McGee, G. (2002) The human cloning debate. (Berkeley, CA: Berkeley Hills Books)
Nisbet, M.C. (2004) Public opinion about stem cell research and human
cloning. Public Opinion Quarterly 68: 1-34.
Nudeshima, J.
(2001) Human cloning legislation in Japan. Eubios Journal of Asian and
International Bioethics 11: 2.
Reilly, P.R. (2000) Public concern about genetics. Annual Review of
Genomics and Human Genetics 1: 485-506.
Schuman, H., Presser, S. (1996) Questions and answers in attitude surveys:
experiments on question form, wording, and context. (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications).
Singer, E.,
et al. (1998) Genetic testing, engineering, and therapy: awareness and
attitudes. Public Opinion Quarterly 62: 633-664.
Spranger, T.
M. (2002) Human cloning in Singapore: emergence of Asian bioethics? Eubios
Journal of Asian and International Bioethics 12: 122.
Tharien, A.K. (1998) Human cloning - the global response. Eubios
Journal of Asian and International Bioethics 8: 9-10.
TIME/CNN (2001) TIME/CNN poll – cloning, March 16. Available at:
http://www.time.com/time/health/printout/0,8816,99005,00.html
TNS Intersearch (2001) Majority opposes human cloning. Available at: http://abcnews.go.com/sections/scitech/DailyNews/poll010816_cloning.html