November 18, 1974
Dear Paul:
I enclose a copy of a letter to the editor of Genetics which will appear in the October issue of that journal.  I hope it does not sound superficial or denigrating to the important effect your committee had in awakening all scientists to a potential hazard.  Your efforts seem to me to have been resoundingly, perhaps embarrassingly successful.  My letter's intention is to suggest that we would do better to emulate the methods and safeguards used for known, natural pathogens rather than to acquiesce to the construction of another bureaucratic thicket like the human research committees.
The letter was written in response to Dave Stadler's plea for something controversial or stimulating to put in the letters section of Genetics. Thinking back to our conversations over the past year on this subject, as well as my own experiences on our human research committee, this is what I came up with after a month or two of mulling over the matter and reading the correspondence in Nature and Science. I have discussed the letter with many of the people in my department and in Experimental Pathology here at Scripps. I found most to be in agreement with my main thesis, and I hope you will be too. If not, perhaps we can agree to disagree amicably on the best approach to this problem.
Will enjoyed his weekend at Stanford very much, and now that football season is over he is busy completing his application to go there next fall. There has never been any doubt that he prefers Stanford over any other school. I hope he was not too much of a nuisance during his visit. I'm just sorry he couldn't have brought Stanford through to a win over USC!
Best regards,
Irving
Irving P. Crawford, M.D.