**3.3 A future third period?**

196 Biomedicine

One of the factors not included in the Eurobarometer, but adds clues to the perception of this type of research, is the evaluation of the use of induced pluripotent stem cells (iPS), which would avoid the use of embryonic cells and, as such, close many debates. According to the study by the Fundación BBVA, acceptation increases in the case of techniques that

7,2

6,9 6,6 6,4 6,4 6,3 6,3 6,1 6 5,8

5,4

5,8

6,4

5

012345678

Graph 5. Situation without destruction of the embryo. 0 signifies completely unacceptable

The polarization of political and public opinion around the ethical questions related to research with embryonic stem cells has contributed to the growth in interest in obtaining adult stem cells. The defense of the use of embryonic cells tends to ride on its potential future use for cellular transplants. If there were equivalent alternatives, it would be more complicated to defend the use of human embryos in order to get stem cells from them. In this sense, induced pluripotent stem cells could change the terrain of the ethical debates. Those opposed to the use of embryonic stem cells might interpret the results of the research done with stem cells (adult or derived from umbilical cord blood) in a more optimistic way than the experiments show. In the same way, defenders of human embryonic stem cells might be less open if the potential risks of these cells in clinical use were considered. Private clinics operate precisely in this confused space, confronting a medical necessity that millions of patients with incurable diseases demand. Commercials for stem cell clinics often represent the patients as being responsible for their own destiny, while portraying standard clinical medicine as reactionary. They appeal strongly to the needs of patients, some with

from a moral perspective and 10 completely acceptable. (Fundación BBVA, 2008)

5,2

don't harm or destroy the embryo.

Denmark Sweden

Spain

Ireland Italy France Poland Germany Austria United States

Japan Israel

Czech Republic

Nehterlands United Kingdom The report from 2010 seems to open a third period of falling optimism between 2005 and 2010, at least by one point, as can be seen in Graph 6 (European Commission, 2010). We can continue talking about optimism, but the changes that arise in biotechnology and genetic engineering, and the tendencies the surveys are currently showing, is what especially interests us. If we pay attention to Graph 6, the rise in optimism for wind, solar and nuclear energy in this last period contrasts with the fall in optimism for Computers and Information

Graph 6. Trends in the optimism index of certain technologies (European Commission, 2010a)

them.

**5. Acknowledgment** 

**6. References** 

Crossings on Public Perception of Biomedicine: Spain and the European Indicators 199

mechanisms to favor greater public participation in the regulation and risk prevention of

This chapter was carried out as part of the Cartographies of Science and Technology:

Atienza, J. Luján, J.L. (1997), *La Imagen Social de las Nuevas Tecnologías Biológicas en España,* 

Bauer, M. W., (2009), "The evolution of public understanding of science-Discourse and

Bauer, M. W., (2003), "Controversial medical and agri-food biotechnology: a cultivation

Bauer, M., y Schoon, I., (1993), "Mapping Variety in Public Understanding of Science" *Public* 

European Commission, (1991), *Eurobarometer 35.1.* Commission of the European

European Commission, (1993), *Eurobarometer 38.1. Europeans, Science and Technology: Public Understanding and/ Attitudes*, Commission of the European Communities: Brussels European Commission, (1996), *Eurobarometer 46.1.* Commision of the European

European Commission, (2002), *Eurobarometer 58.0. Europeans and Biotechnology in 2002*,

European Commision, (2005a), *Eurobarometer 64.3. Europeans and Biotechnology in 2005:* 

European Commission, (2005b), *Europeans, Science and Technology*, European Commission:

European Commission, (2010a), *Europeans and Biotechnology in 2010*. *Winds of change?*,

European Commission, (2010b), *Science and Technology*, European Commission: Luxembourg

Fundación BBVA, (2008), "Actitudes hacia la investigación con células madre", *II Estudio de* 

IESA, (1990) *Biotecnología y Opinión Pública en España,* Instituto de Estudios Sociales

Luján, J. L. y Todt, O., (2000), "Perceptions, attitudes and ethical valuations: the ambivalence

Marlier, E., (1991), "Eurobarometer 35.1: Opinions of Europeans on Biotechnology"in

*Biotecnología de la Fundación BBVA* ("Attitudes Toward Stem Cell Research", *II* 

Avanzados: Madrid (*Biotechnology and Public Opinion in Spain*, Institute of

of the public image of biotechnology in Spain", *Public Understanding of Science*, 9:

CIS: Madrid (*The Social Image of New Biological Technologies in Spain*)

comparative evidence", *Science, Technology & Society*, 14: 221 – 242

Ethnographies, Images and Epistemologies (FFI 2009-07138-FISO) project.

analysis", *Public Understanding of Science*, 11: 93 – 113

*Patterns and Trends*, European Commission: Luxembourg

FECYT (2006): *Tercera encuesta nacional sobre percepción social de la ciencia*, Madrid. FECYT (2010): *Quinta encuesta nacional sobre percepción social de la ciencia*, Madrid.

*Understanding of Science*, 2 (1993): 141–155

European Commission: Luxembourg

Advanced Social Studies: Madrid)

*Study of Biotechnology from the BBVA Foundation*)

Communities: Brussels

Communities: Brussels

European Commission.

Luxembourg

383-392

*Biotechnology in Public*

Technologies (IT), nanotechnology, biotechnology and genetic engineering. On one side, alternative energies show a rise because of the "Copenhagen Effect." The controversy surrounding climate change, global warming and carbon emissions has helped feed optimism in renewable energies. Regarding the rise in nuclear energy, it must be taken into account that while those who support solar energy also support wind energy, their opinions are divided regarding nuclear energy, between optimism (46%) and pessimism (42%).

How to explain, then, the drop for computers and IT, nanotechnology, biotechnology and genetic engineering? The 2010 report considers that nanotechnology as well as biotechnology show this drop because of the rise (from 12% to 20% in biotechnology) in the response "make things worse." The disenchantment society feels seeing highly promising announcements that later don't materialize in products, therapies, etc., has a lot to do with it. The possibility for future conflicts, especially between the Spanish food industry and consumers, derives from the gap between the perception of the industry toward consumers, mainly as being passive, and the attitudes of the consumer (Todt et. al., 2009).
