New worldwide survey reveals mixed attitude towards breakthrough technology

Breakthrough technologies can significantly improve our lives. Progress in cell and gene therapies can cause a revolution in the treatment paradigms. New genomic techniques can make our crops more resilient for climate change. AI can speed up the development of drugs dramatically and streamlin patient care, while cultivated meat makes it possible to sustainable, cruelty -free animal meat.

But we only have to look at the current challenges on public health, such as rising vaccine hesitation and earlier hostility towards GMOs to understand that science itself is only part of the journey. Getting public acceptance is just as important as great science, because the ultimate measure of success goes beyond technological development. What really matters is the impact of it.

As an investor in the life sciences, I am extremely optimistic about how technology can change the world for the better, but it is important to appreciate that emerging science can be confronted with reactions ranging from uncertainty to resistance.

To understand how certain breakthrough technologies are observed by people of all ages around the world, Bayer has performed one of the largest in the world surveys From public attitudes that span various countries and demography. In collaboration with Boston Consulting Group, with market research carried out by IPSOS, we have investigated more than 13,000 people in 13 countries and six continents about their hope, fears and concerns about cell and gene therapy, AI in medicine, new genomic techniques (NGTs) In agriculture and cultivated meat. Here are some of the most important collection restaurants:

1. Despite limitations, public support for NGTs is high

The use of NGTs, such as gene processing in agriculture, is greatly limited in the European Union, a continuous consequence of the GMO legislation of 2001. However, there are signs that public attitudes are shifting, in which 47% of respondents in Germany, France and Italy is favorable to them, compared to 34% who felt neutral, and only 12% who had negative views.

The EU is currently proposing new legislation to distinguish NGTs from traditional GMOs, a legal shift that could lead to a broader acceptance in Europe. Brandon Mcfadden, a professor at the Department of Agricultural Economics of the University of Arkansas, said in an interview that public attitude towards gene working seems to be more favorable than GGOs.

In countries with a lower income, the public perspectives were even more favorable, in which 72% of respondents considered NGTs in agriculture as a positive, and noted their potential to take on critical challenges, such as food security. McFadden believes that this is because concern about food availability and the costs of food are still felt acute in these parts of the world.

“Because they spend a higher part of their disposable income on food, the load is much heavier than that by consumers in a high income,” he said. “Consumers in low and middle income countries are also more likely to achieve part of their food, and therefore NGT benefits, such as not having to spray insecticide and therefore the reduction of exposure to toxicity is more welcome.”

2. A light point of optimism in the midst of decreasing trust

In general, 74% of respondents worldwide were optimistic about the potential for cell and gene therapy to cure diseases in the coming years, the highest percentage of optimism compared to one of the technologies investigated. This level of enthusiasm was stable in all ages, from Gen Z to Boomers.

But at the same time it was strikingly clear that trust in the public health authorities is decreasing sharply in the West.

For example, only 48% of people in France and 56% of Americans relate to their national health authorities to act in the interest of the public, compared to 73% in China and 86% in Nigeria.

Professional professor Jeffrey Morris, an expert in distrust and disinformation, attributes this to the growing consequences of political polarization and the changing way in which we consume news and information, in particular in the West. “Instead of trusting shared sources, individuals often come across news on their personal beliefs and perspectives,” he says. “When political ideologies become interwoven with scientific issues, this dynamic can undermine confidence in the scientific community, even about critical public health matters.”

Morris believes that this was exacerbated by the hardships, uncertainty and controversial mitigation measures caused by the COVID-19 Pandemie and is of the opinion that policy makers, the media and the scientific community are not sufficiently concerned with public concerns, which improved mistrust .

“During the pandemic I often noticed that individuals were fired or silenced for asking valid questions,” he says. “I believe that the trust of the public would have been stronger due to better involvement, responding with evidence-based answers, openly recognizing uncertainties and treating questions with respect.”

3. AI is the least preference where it is most advanced

Although most respondents believe that AI plays a key role in improving the diagnoses of the diseases, increasing access to means such as support for mental health and accelerating the discovery of drugs, the public is concerned about how how AI will be used clinically.

77% of the respondents expressed concern about AI that replaces people with important medical decisions, in which 74% are concerned about the potential for medical errors or a wrong diagnosis. Again, public support for the future use of AI in medicine was highest in countries with a lower and higher middle income, while American respondents were one of the least likely to prefer an AI-supported treatment of diseases, despite the fact that The US that has already done 950 AI or Machine-Learning engaged medical devices that have been erased by the FDA.

Dr. Mhairi Morris, a researcher at the University of Loughborough, says that a certain degree of public resistance can be expected in the US and Europe, where healthcare systems already have more resources, which means that new technologies will get greater control. “In Asia and Africa, many areas are confronted with shortages of health care staff, which means that AI can be a more welcome, cost -effective innovation,” she says.

However, it believes that public trust can be improved by more clarity in how these technologies will be used in health care, information about whether AI tools are trained on a diverse range of patient data sets and guarantees that the output will be by a person assessed prior to treatment decisions. “If people get reassurance about the accuracy of the information used to make decisions, I believe that trust can be won over time,” she says.

4. Cultivated meat has work to do

Despite the highly promoted potential benefits for animal welfare and the environment, it is clear that cultivated meat remains a controversial field for the public. Only 39% of the respondents issued positive views, the lowest of the four breakthrough technologies. European countries such as France and Germany, as well as the US, showed the strongest negative perceptions of cultivated meat.

Academics, such as Andrew Capel at the University of Loughborough, are of the opinion that work should be done to reassure consumers of the nutritional benefits of consuming cultivated meat, with vegetable protein alternatives currently seen as the gold standard for ethical protein production in Europe . Mcfadden is of the opinion that the industry must overcome the perception that such products are unnatural. “Concerns about unnatural often evokes a sense of disgust,” he says.

However, it is not all bad news for the sector. It is intriguing that the biggest growth areas in the short term African countries and parts of America such as Mexico can be, where the respondents were the least reluctant about the idea of ​​trying cultivated meat, something that the consulted external experts attributed to the increasing costs of conventional Costs meat production around the world.

“People in many of these countries may need more meat in their diet or do they want to worry less about the source,” says McFadden. “It is generally easy and cheap to buy meat in the US and Europe, compared to other regions.”

Look forward

For innovators, the messages from the survey are clear: training the public about your technology. The more people know, the more optimistic they are inclined to feel. Ignorance grows distrust.

It is also crucial to be as transparent as possible with your stakeholders – your investors, employees and customers. Empathetic and timely communication will help people take with you on your journey and to establish a basis for trust.

Although there is a lot of work to do to climb the mountain of public acceptance, I am generally encouraged by the results of the survey. They show that many people all over the world want the tools and therapies to strive for those innovators in the life sciences to develop. This is time for us to double and create the future we want to see – a world where we get a little closer to health every day, hunger for nobody.

Thank you to David Cox for additional research and reporting on this article.