85–77% of clinicians were very or extremely concerned with:
• False expectations about the future child
• Low accuracy of genetic estimates for conditions/traits
• Promoting eugenic thinking/practices
• Confusion over how to interpret the test results and use the information

Clinicians were evenly split on whether PES should be allowed or not (44% vs. 45%).

Overall caution was clear: 58% said risks outweigh benefits, while 16% said benefits outweigh risks.

Across specific scenarios, clinicians (REIs) drew a sharp distinction between health-related (e.g., cancer risk) and trait-based (e.g., IQ) uses of PES:
• 59% approved of health-related embryo selection
• 6% approved of behavioral trait-based selection

Clinicians (n=144) showed low overall approval of people using polygenic embryo screening:

• 12% approved.
• 42% neither approved nor disapproved.
• 46% disapproved.

Polygenic embryo screening is being marketed commercially – but how do IVF clinicians view it?

• General approval is low (12%)

For specific uses:
• 59% approved of health-related embryo selection
• 6% approved of trait-based selection

🧵 Survey findings in NPJ Genomic Medicine

Participants also rated each technology on:
🔹Perceived benefit
🔹Acceptability
🔹Likelihood of using it themselves
🔹Invasiveness
🔹Risk
🔹Perceived change to the person

Would you consider using these neurotechnologies if you were experiencing severe mood, memory, or motor symptoms?

Here’s how 1000+ U.S participants responded when asked that exact question.

🚨 NEW STUDY!!🚨 Sharing our latest paper published in JAMA Network Open:
jamanetwork.com/journals/jam...

"Public Attitudes, Interests, and Concerns Regarding Polygenic Embryo Screening"

I share some thoughts on the findings in Harvard Medical School's news release:
hms.harvard.edu/news/study-r...