U.S. Public Opinion & Interest on Human Enhancements Technology JANUARY 2018

Transcription

1 Debra Whitman, Ph.D. AARP Chief Public Policy Officer Jeff Love, Ph.D. G. Rainville, Ph.D. Laura Skufca, M.A. U.S. Public Opinion & Interest on Human Enhancements Technology JANUARY 2018 DOI:

2 ABOUT AARP is the nation s largest nonprofit, nonpartisan organization dedicated to empowering Americans 50 and older to choose how they live as they age. With nearly 38 million members and offices in every state, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands, AARP works to strengthen communities and advocate for what matters most to families with a focus on health security, financial stability and personal fulfillment. AARP also works for individuals in the marketplace by sparking new solutions and allowing carefully chosen, high-quality products and services to carry the AARP name. As a trusted source for news and information, AARP produces the world s largest circulation publications, AARP The Magazine and AARP Bulletin.To learn more, visit or on social media. The views expressed herein are for information, debate, and discussion, and do not necessarily represent official policies of AARP.

3 We would like to extend a special thanks to members of the Global Future Council on Human Enhancement for their contributions. Jennette Leung Corinna Lathan Noah Radford Simone Schurle Jessica Bland Alvaro Fernandez Linda Fried Ted Friedmann Marina Krommenacker AARP s Policy, Research, and International group conducted this work to inform the World Economic Forum, Global Future Council (GFC) on Human Enhancement. Special thanks to GFC members and the Dubai Future Foundation who provided essential input and review. NORC at the University of Chicago collected the data for AARP using its nationally representative online panel, AmeriSpeak. This report was prepared by Jeff Love, Laura Skufca, G. Rainville, and Laura Mehegan in AARP Research. 3

4 OBJECTIVES To examine public acceptance towards various human enhancements technologies (i.e., vision, mobility, cognition, & gene-editing) as well as their interest and concerns about these enhancements. To understand characteristics of people who support human enhancements as well as characteristics of people who oppose it. To gauge interest in three new product concepts conceptualized by the Dubai Future Foundation (i.e., Endorphomatic, Auto Lingua, & NewKnees). 4

5 WHY ARE HUMAN ENHANCEMENTS IMPORTANT TO AARP? The Global Future Council on Human Enhancement s mandate calls for an exploration of how development in human enhancement could impact industry, governments, and society. We believe part of this exploration is an adequate understanding of how the public regards human enhancement generally and particular enhancements specifically. Our approach to assessing public opinion about human enhancement differs from previous efforts in that they only looked at enhancements that are well beyond what we normally see in society. We began with an assessment of technologies that seek to correct health deficiencies, and then moved to capture pubic opinion of how these technologies could be used to enhance normal human abilities. We believe questions about therapeutic use of technologies sets a needed context for the average person to adequately assess how these technologies could be used to augment human abilities. 5

6 METHODOLOGY SURVEY DATA POPULATION ERROR PERCENTAGES An online survey fielded August 23, September 6, 2017 among a nationally representative sample of 2,025 Americans age 18+ using NORC s AmeriSpeak panel. The data were weighted by age, gender, race, ethnicity, employment status and income to be representative of the entire U.S. population. All estimates are for the general 18+ US population unless otherwise noted. The margin of error for the national sample of 2,025 adults age 18+ is +/- 2.8 percentage points. The margin of error will be higher among subgroups (e.g., age cohorts, gender, etc.). Percentages may not equal 100% due to rounding. 6

7 GENERAL PERCEPTIONS OF TECHNOLOGY AND AWARENESS OF HUMAN ENHANCEMENT TECHNOLOGIES

8 TECHNOLOGY EFFECTS ON SOCIETY Most Americans believe technology has had a positive effect on society, but more than one-third acknowledge a downside as well. 8

9 HUMAN ENHANCEMENT TECHNOLOGIES Most Americans have not heard very much about human enhancement technologies, as defined by the World Economic Forum Global Future Council on Human Enhancement. Less than one in ten say they have used them. 9

10 WHO SHOULD MAKE DECISIONS? ABOUT HUMAN ENHANCEMENT TECHNOLOGIES Adults believe many entities should be involved in decisions related to human enhancements, with ethics professionals and University researchers at the top of the list. Lesser percentages see a role for companies or religious groups or leaders. 10

11 HUMAN ENHANCEMENT TECHNOLOGIES

12 TYPES OF HUMAN ENHANCEMENTS There were five types of human enhancements explored in this study. 12

13 SUPPORT CONTINUUM To ease respondents into the concept of human enhancements, support was assessed along a continuum ranging from therapeutic use (restoring ability when decline has taken place) to enhancing abilities greatly beyond normal human level. Note: Gene-editing was not assessed with this progressive approach due to the nature of gene-editing. 13

14 VISION ENHANCEMENTS It is appropriate to use. There is near universal agreement that vision enhancements are appropriate as a therapeutic intervention or prevention when a known risk is evident. Support drops considerably when these enhancements become elective or go beyond normal human capabilities. AARP RESEARCH 2018 AARP. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 14

15 VISION ENHANCEMENTS Percent who agree with the use of vision enhancements that go beyond normal, by demographic group. AARP RESEARCH 2018 AARP. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 15

16 ATTITUDES TOWARDS ENHANCEMENTS Attitudes towards the These enhancements will increase the degree to which individuals are monitored by the government or marketers (68% agree). These enhancements will have unforeseen personal health consequences (73% agree). Individuals with these enhancements should be monitored in order to detect any health side effects (89% agree). use of human enhancements falls into one of three categories. Those who get the enhancement will have more power and take advantage of those who do not have the enhancement (60% agree). These enhancements will allow people to live healthier, longer lives (57% agree). The general use of these enhancements should be determined by a panel of medical experts (79% agree). There will be a problem where those who get the enhancement will separate themselves from those who do not get it (59% agree). These enhancements will make people feel more confident and better about themselves (28% agree). These enhancements should be available to everyone who wants them (59% agree). AARP RESEARCH 2018 AARP. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 16

17 USE OF VISION ENHANCEMENT BY ATTITUDE & BELIEF Percent who agree with the use of vision enhancements that go beyond normal, by attitude & belief. AARP RESEARCH 2018 AARP. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 17

18 JOINT REPLACEMENTS It is appropriate to use. Similar findings are seen with joint replacements yet less support enhancements when a risk is evident. Lesser percentages support enhancements when no need is evident. AARP RESEARCH 2018 AARP. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 18

19 COGNITIVE ENHANCEMENT It is appropriate to use medications/implanted devices to There is agreement that medications for cognitive decline due to aging are appropriate as a therapeutic intervention. Support drops considerably when these enhancements become elective. Lesser percentages support an implanted device for cognitive abilities compared to medications. AARP RESEARCH 2018 AARP. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 19

20 Word cloud of open-ended statements of those in favor of human enhancements. 20

21 Select comments from our respondents on why they support human enhancements. 21

22 Word cloud of open-ended statements of those who oppose human enhancements. 22

23 Select comments from our respondents about their concerns on human enhancements. 23

24 IMPROVEMENT OF ONE S OWN ABILITIES A minority of Americans are personally interested in human enhancement technologies to improve their own abilities beyond what they would normally have even when their abilities are normal. The most interest is seen with medications to improve one s cognitive abilities. Those expressing relative interest in these medications are age 18-49, those having more than a college education, and are familiar with and/or have used enhancements. AARP RESEARCH 2018 AARP. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 24

25 SAFETY & ENHANCEMENTS OF HUMAN ENHANCEMENTS Most would not change their personal level of interest if informed about the safety and effectiveness of these enhancements. AARP RESEARCH 2018 AARP. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 25

26 HUMAN ENHANCEMENT INTEREST - DEMO GROUP Percent personally interested in the Human Enhancements that go beyond normal, by demographic group. 26

27 HUMAN ENHANCEMENT INTEREST - ATTITUDES & BELIEFS Percent personally interested in the Human Enhancements that go beyond normal, by attitudes & beliefs. 27

28 EFFECTS ON SOCIETY About half of Americans are worried human enhancements that go beyond normal negatively affecting society. Worry is highest with cognitive enhancements via implanted devices. 28

29 QUALITY OF LIFE While many oppose using human enhancements to improve abilities to a level beyond what one would normally have, most agree these enhancements would improve the individual s quality of life. 29

30 GENE-EDITING TECHNOLOGIES

31 GENE EDITING There is considerable support for gene editing to cure disease, improve muscle/joint/organ function, and to even prevent aging. Most oppose gene editing to determine human characteristics such as eye color or intelligence or to make people stronger. 31

32 Word cloud of open-ended statements of those who oppose gene editing. 32

33 GENE EDITING TECHNOLOGIES Two-thirds of Americans are worried about gene-editing negatively affecting society; however most feel it probably would improve the quality of life for the people who undergo it. 33

34 CHARACTERISTICS OF PEOPLE GENERALLY SUPPORTING & GENERALLY OPPOSING HUMAN ENHANCEMENTS

35 Characteristics of those who generally support advanced human enhancements. 35

36 Characteristics of those who generally oppose advanced human enhancements. 36

37 NEW CONCEPT TESTING

38 Interest was assessed for hypothetical devices to improve mood, translate language, and improve physical performance. ENDORPHOMATIC Personal mood and energy control device applied to the forehead. Takes control of the body s hormonal cycles to improve mood and enable relaxation. AUTOLINGUA Brain implant that allows user to access instant translation of five common languages through a brain interface. NEWKNEES Knee replacement joints that enable the user to run at superhuman speeds, jump over five meters, and lift staggering amounts of weight. SOURCE: Fall 2035 Augmentation Upgrades: A Field Guide to the Future; Dubai Future Foundation. 38

39 HYPOTHETICAL DEVICES Two-thirds (67%) expressed interest in the Endorphomatic to improve mood swings, low energy, and insomnia and over half (57%) were interested in to improve focus. Interest was lower for the two devices that would require altering the body via more intrusive measures. 39

40 DUBAI FUTURE FOUNDATION PRODUCTS - DEMO GROUP Percent personally interested in the Dubai Future Foundation Products, by demographic group. 40

41 DUBAI FUTURE FOUNDATION PRODUCTS - ATTITUDES & BELIEFS Percent personally interested in the Dubai Future Foundation Products, by attitudes & beliefs. AARP RESEARCH 2018 AARP. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED 41

42 CONCERNS The top concern for all three products is unforeseen complications and side effects. ENDORPHOMATIC (TOTAL CONCERNED) AUTOLINGUA (TOTAL CONCERNED) NEWKNEES (TOTAL CONCERNED) Unforeseen complications and side effects (86%) Unforeseen complications and side effects (79%) Unforeseen complications and side effects (78%) Product would take over my brain or be addictive (80%) Loss of privacy and too much monitoring (72%) Unforeseen negative societal impacts (62%) 42

43 CONCLUSIONS AWARENESS TRENDS SURVEY OPPOSITION Awareness of human enhancement technology is minimal. About one in ten adults say they are currently using what they would consider human enhancement technologies. The general trend is for the public to decrease support for interventions when they move from therapeutic to enhancement. Across the survey, concern increases with more invasive interventions. This is clearly seen when comparing enhancements that involve surgery or implants. While there is some receptivity among subgroups such as nonbelievers and males, opposition to interventions that enhance abilities is primarily motivated by health and societal concerns as well as religion. 43

44 CONCLUSIONS HEALTH PERCENTAGES SAFETY ENDORPHOMATIC There was no correlation between respondent health status or family history of disease and support or opposition for these enhancements. However, health status and family history is indicative of support if and only if respondents have low societal and health concerns. Significant percentages of those who oppose human enhancement technologies still believe interventions could improve the quality of life of recipients. Interestingly, most respondents say knowing more about the safety or effectiveness of an enhancement does not increase their interest in enhancements. Interest in the three potential human enhancement products suggested by the Dubai Future Foundation is highest for the Endorphomatic. Nearly eight in ten expressed concern about side effects and complications of these products. 44

45 RECOMMENDATIONS Provide information and education on the benefits of human enhancements, how their use will be monitored, as well as the safety and effectiveness of these technologies. Specifically: 45