Hiring in life sciences? Share your open positions with our professional community. Read more Close

Advertisement

EUGENICS AND POLYGENIC EMBRYO SCREENING: PUBLIC, CLINICIAN, AND PATIENT PERCEPTIONS OF CONDITIONS VERSUS TRAITS.

Created on 25 Jun 2025

Authors

Dorit Barlevy, Rémy A Furrer, Asha Kalapatapu, Abigail Martinez, Todd Lencz, Shai Carmi, Gabriel Lázaro-Muñoz, Stacey Pereira

Published in

Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics. Pages 101507. Jun 21, 2025. Epub Jun 21, 2025.

Abstract

Polygenic embryo screening (PES) estimates an embryo's genetic chances of developing complex conditions (e.g., cancer) and traits (e.g., height). Stakeholders have raised concerns that PES promotes eugenic practices and ideology.
We surveyed a nationally representative sample of the US public on approval of screening embryos for 12 conditions and 12 traits, and examined the association between disapproval and concern about eugenics. We also conducted semi-structured interviews with US-based reproductive endocrinology and infertility specialists (REIs) and in vitro fertilization (IVF) patients on their perspectives towards PES.
Among the US public (n=1423), disapproval of screening embryos for traits has a stronger association with concern that PES promotes eugenics than disapproval of screening embryos for conditions. Interviews with REIs (n=27) and IVF patients (n=26) suggest that perceptions of PES as eugenic were more common when discussing screening and selecting for or against traits versus selecting against conditions.
Results suggest PES for traits is more frequently associated with eugenics and perceived often as unacceptable while PES for conditions is perceived sometimes as acceptable. Future research should explore whether the distinction between conditions and traits is meaningful in the definition of eugenics and/or approval of genomics-based embryo selection and how that influences clinical practices and policy.

PMID:
40557708
Bibliographic data and abstract were imported from PubMed on 25 Jun 2025.

Read full publication at:
Please sign in to see all details.

Advertisement

Stats

  • Community rating n/a 0 votes
  • Reviewers' rating n/a 0 votes
  • Your rating

1-terrible, 9-excellent. How would you rate this publication? Sign in in to submit your rating.

  • Recommendations n/a n/a positive of 0 vote(s)
  • Views 29
  • Comments 0

Recommended by

  • No recommendations yet.

Post a comment

You need to be signed in to post comments. You can sign in here.

Comments

There are no comments yet.

Advertisement