Science part more - anything I inject will either be in brackets  or I'll call it out: Animal Research: Just over half (55%) of people find performing research on animals morally acceptable. Gallup surveys show this to be a generally-declining trend, as it was 65% in 2001 (when Gallup first started asking. Secondary surveys from 1988 also show this decline. VCU in 2007 asked the question of whether someone was "in favor of using animals in research." 67% found it acceptable at that time. A Gallup 2008 survey showed that 64% opposed banning medical research on animals, and 59% opposed banning it on products. There is a gender and age gap associated - women and young people like animals, older meaner men hate them. Joking pejoratives aside, women or younger respondents were less in favor than male or older respondents. Results weren't much different internationally - in 2010 Europeans were asked about specific animals. When asked about dogs and monkeys [they didn't ask if you were a dog or cat person, though...], 44% strongly favored using them for medical research. 37% strongly did not want to use them. Again, men (49%) were more inclined to use them than women (39%). When asked about mice instead of dogs or monkeys, the result spiked - 66% found it acceptable [because fuck mice?]. Stem Cells and Cloning: Most Americans (60%) saw using embryonic stem cells as "morally acceptable." This peaked in 2007 (64%) but has been stable since (57-62%) and is up significantly since 2002 (52%). 71% of people were in favor of using non-embryonic stem cells. VCU found this number also peaked in 2007 (75%). If the question was phrased as "if you or a member of your family had Parkinsons or a spinal cord injury, would you support the use of embryonic stem cells in order to pursue treatment for that condition?" respondents [predictably?] were more in favor. A 2013 Gallup survey found that only 13% of people said that human cloning was "morally acceptable," and 83% said it was "morally wrong." This is up from 7% in 2001, but since 2001 it has fluctuated between 8% and 13% meaning this is still within the range of "not really changing." The remaining 4% looked at their younger, identical twin and said "haha, you're morally unacceptable." 100% of those younger twins said "no you are." [This terrible joke is obviously not part of the study] When no medical purpose is mentioned, VCU found that 8 in 10 Americans opposed human cloning. When participants were asked specifically about using 'cloning technology' to treat rare diseases, the results were much more mixed (% not provided). Using cloning for "therapeutic" [i.e. medical] purposes has been increasing slowly. 54% of Americans were "somewhat clear" or "very clear" on the differences between the uses of embryonic stem cells, stem cells from adults, and stem cells from other sources. XX Comment: I didn't think I knew the difference, so I looked it up. It's quite probable that you knew and forgot because it's not something that really comes up - the current thought is that embryonic stem cells can become any type of cell. Adult stem cells can only become similar to their tissue of origin. 2010 European survey found that 63% were in favor of using embryonic stem cells, though that's combined 12% result of "use without requiring special laws" and 51% "only regulated with strict laws." 69% were in favor of using adult stem cells, with the breakdown being 15% and 54%. Human cloning was not surveyed, but animal cloning was. Only 17% said animal cloning was "safe for future generations" [not exactly sure what that means], and 70% disagreed to the statement of "animal cloning in food production should be encouraged.