A study has found that even as the scientific fraternity was expecting a debate over the creation of artificial life in a laboratory, the general public is surprisingly relaxed and accepting the idea.
The study has found that people are taking the idea with open arms, provided the artificial microbes are designed for a good purpose and the motivations of the scientists involved are clearly defined.
A Government-funded project to engage the public in a debate over synthetic biology was eclipsed by the announcement on Thursday night that scientists in the United States have created the world's first synthetic life form- a new type of living cell that is entirely programmed by a laboratory-made chromosome.
Craig Venter, the American genome entrepreneur, led the 40m-dollar study that created the synthetic microbe from a living cell and an artificially constructed chromosome made from a DNA code stored on a computer.
The new study into public attitudes attempts to create a dialogue between the scientists who hope to carry out similar "synbio" research in the UK and the taxpayers who fund the work.
The 250,000 pounds project began last September and has involved a series of focus groups with 160 carefully-selected members of the public from different parts of the country and representing different social and ethnic groups.
And the study was aimed to establish the sort of public dialogue that was lacking over the debacle about genetically modified (GM) crops, which were overwhelmingly rejected by the public.
"We want a very early debate before the first products of synthetic biology come to the market. This technology is going to be very important and the technology must be explained in a way that the public can understand," the Independent quoted Brian Johnson, an independent consultant who chairs the public dialogue panel, as saying.
"Surprisingly, we've not seen wholesale opposition to the creation of artificial life. People are fascinated and genuinely hopeful for what the science can deliver, but they are also genuinely concerned over who governs science and the motivation for doing this type of research.
"They are also deeply concerned about regulation. They believe it needs to be developed and it has to have an international dimension. They would for instance like to ask Craig Venter about his motivation for doing this kind of research and the regulations relating to it," he added.