OFFICE MEMORANDUM e© STANFORD UNIVERSITY ¢ OFFICE MEMORANDUM e¢ STANFORD UNIVERSITY © OFFICE MEMORANDUM

To

FROM

SUBJECT:

Date: August 23, 1974

Dr, Robert Stone
Director, NIH

Joshua Lederberg
Professor of Genetics

DNA Biohazards

I hardly need to say that the major thrust of Dr, Berg's committee
was entirely commendable and whatever critical remarks I have to make are
confined to one specific strategy of statement, That is the emphasis on the
asserted novelty of these kinds of proceedings, The statement that self-
regulation in science has little or no precedent has certain latent implications
about the scientific process which a number of critics have in fact been quick
to understand and seize upon. The implication is obviously that scientists have
been inherently irresponsible in the past and that unless some regulatory
framework is laid on they will act like mischievous little boys flying off in
all directions throwing firecrackers into gasoline tanks, I know that was very
far from the intentions of authors of statements about the novelty of self-
regulation, but nevertheless it already has happerf “to a substantial degree and
I wanted to spread some word of warning about undesirable side-effects of
careless statements of this kind in the future,

The fact is that like every other activity science has been sharply
constrained by social sanctions of many, many kinds and that the so-called
doctrine of pursuing every experiment wherever it leads regardless of
consequences has never in fact been operational, nor could it be in an ethical
or lawful society. The fact is that scientists are so lawabiding and generally
so responsive to social sanctions that many of these concerns have been
internalized, are accepted informally without great fuss and question, or are
part of the overall legal framework in which every citizen operates, Now,
plainly there are some unprecedented aspects of work with DNA molecules, but
the basic issues are hardly different from those which faced the early
bacteriologists when they were handling very dangerous microbes indeed with the
aim of developing means of controlling them, And I do not argue the point that
we perhaps may need some new institutional safeguards in the present
circumstances, although I suspect that very much more stringent ones that are
necessary will be forced upon us partly in consequence of careless language
about the situation,

I am reminded, too, of any number of very explicit precedents for the
very careful examination of risks before major experiments were undertaken;
just as, of course, one can point to many cases both within science and more
often outside of it where major ventures were undertaken without such pre-
examination,

- One that I have been particularly involved with and therefore know more

about but have never believed to be without precedent in the history of science
concerns the hazards of interplanetary quarantine (contamination of the planets
and back contamination of the earth). In fact there is a fairly close analogy
to. the issues raised by the biohazards committee, I am referring to cautions

- about planetary quarantine, both with respect to restraints on transmitting

WNONVYOWIW 3Dd1ddO © ALISHIJAINN GYOINVIS ©

ALISUJAINA GYOINVIS

® WNONVYOWIW ADIGIO e

ALISYFAINA GYOINVIS

WONONTHOWIW 3D14d0
Dr. Robert Stone -2- 8/23/74

organisms from earth to the other planets and perhaps the more nearly
analogous sitution of concerns about back contamination of the earth

from Mars and elsewhere, We have indeed developed very specific institutional
mechanisms for dealing with these concerns, going even to the point of
setting specific standards of risk with respect to planetary contamination
that are a part of fairly formal agreements between governments involved

in the exploration of space. Of course there are great differences in the
detail of sources of hazard in these various circumstances which may make it
easier to focus on operational standards in the context of space exploration
than in molecular biology. This is not the time or place to go into detailed
comment about the proposed moratorium or more enduring restraints on certain
aspects of molecular biology research,but I am very deeply concerned that
carelessness about the details of enforcement and compliance may result in a
smothering blanket that goes far beyond any needs that are reasonable for
the problem intended to be addressed. That kind of over-reaction can only be
encouraged by implications that the scientific community has been incapable
of dealing with its responsibilities to the community in the past, that
concern about social hazards to the community has been habitually out of mind
on the part of responsible scientists and that therefore we must look
systematically for means to police such nefarious activities in an ever
widening area,

Sincerely yours,

ce: Paul Berg
David Hogness
Stan Cohen
Arthur Kornberg

Enclosure: Article 9 of 1966 treaty on space exploration