Martin and Tait, conducted surveys of selected groups of the UK public. They decided to focus on groups that are likely to have greater understanding of biotechnology rather than the general public, and they conclude that groups with an interest in biotechnology have probably already formed attitudes to it, which are unlikely to significantly change. They looked at industry and environmental groups, and local communities, which are major players in the development of policy at both national and local levels. They also suggest that people with the least polarized attitudes are most open to multiple information sources. Consumer research in the Netherlands looked at concerns over eating foods made through biotechnology, using both a survey and a discussion day with respondents focusing on food production, and found that only minor attitude changes occurred with the provision of more information. More recently there have been some discussion forums held among the public in a number of countries, which are used to look at the range of concerns in the lay public.

The generally higher fears about animal genetic engineering, and meat, is also seen in Europe. In a Dutch study, details of twenty different food products were given in a discussion context, and the reasoning about each food was divided into categories. The level of concern was greater with animals, but some products of genetic engineering such as genetically modified chymosin for cheese production, were accepted. Therefore the public does accept some products of genetic engineering, if they have perceived benefits. In the Dutch study in 1991 more concern about some foodstuffs was made by more educated and older respondents, and less concern was seen among Roman Catholics. However, the results of the International Bioethics Survey reveal more mixed and diverse trends with few simple lessons.