Public attitudes toward the use of technology to create new types of animals and animal products

Abstract Philosophers have used thought experiments to examine contentious examples of genetic modification. We hypothesised that these would prove useful in provoking responses from lay participants concerning technological interventions address welfare concerns. asked 747 US and Canadian citizens respond two scenarios based on experiments: genetically modifying chickens produce blind progeny are less likely engage feather-pecking (BC); animals create do not experience any subjective state (i.e. incapable experiencing pain or fear; IA). For contrast, we assessed a third scenario also resulted the production animal protein with no risk suffering but did involve animals: development cultured meat (CM). Participants indicated seven-point scale how acceptable they considered technology (1 = very wrong do; 7 right do), provided text-based, open-ended explanation their response. The creation was judged more than insentient animals. Qualitative some accepted constraints imposed by experiment, for example, accepting perceived harms achieve benefits reducing suffering. Others expressed discomfort such trade-offs, advocating other approaches harm. conclude people vary acceptance within existing systems, calling transformational change.