STANFORD UNIVERSITY
, MEDICAL CENTER
PALO ALTO, CALIFORNIA

DEPARTMENT OF GENFT January 22, 1962
School of Medicine

Dr. G.E.W. Wolstenholme
The CIBA Foundation

kl Portland Place
London, W.1, England

Dear Dr. Wolstenholme:

Thank you very much for your letter of 29 December - | must
' apologize for having been so tardy in answering it, but | have been
away 2 good part of this month and | have been trying to formulate the
‘most constructive reaction possible.

The idea of your Symposium on Biological Future of Man is a
very intriguing one, and | would be honored and challenged to attempt to
make some contribution to it. | am afraid | would have not very much to
say about the impact of space research though perhaps even some brief
cautionary remarks on this theme could be useful. There is the conceptually
related problem in adaptation, to the overall expansion of human techno-
logical activity and its effect. on the motivational structure of scientific |
work, but it is easier to sense some uneasiness about such a problem than
to make useful comments on it. However, perhaps all of this need not be
more than ¢ voint of departure for more general discussions, and | am sure
you would not object if I were to join in on the discussion on the eugenical
program. Unfortunately, intriguing as the program is, | do not think | can
plan to participate if you are bound to have it as early as this November,
as | have a number of other commitments on my schedule. If you should have
other reasons to revise your plan so as to postpone the meeting until the
following spring, | would be delighted to hear further from you about it.

Your Symposium is built on a most intriguing idea; .1 could only
comment that it might be more effective if it concentrated somewhat more
narrowly on man as a biological and social entity and did not attempt to
bring in too much about his environment - for example, resources, polution
or nutrition - except incidentally to some further remarks about the human
condition.

You ask for some suggestions for names = two that | would very much
like to see on the program despite any seeming incongruity are Albert Schweitzer
and J.R. Oppenheimer. If | may also suggest some additional names of distinguished
American scientists who could bring valuable merit to this kind of conference:
Ernst Mayr and James F. Crow (evolution); Seymour Kety (neurophysiology and
osychiatry); Hilary Koprowski (cell biology and virology}. 1 would also add
Paul Doty as an emminently knowledgable biochemist and as a member of the
President's Scientific Advisory Committee bringing some experience in
oolitical science.

| realize that my indecision with respect to my availability next
November may recuire that | forego a place as you complete your plans; |
do hope, however, that you can remain in touch with me to give me as much
time as possible for final irrevocable decision.

Sincerely,
Dr. G.E.W. Wolstenholme 2 January 22, 1%62

P.S. The more | think of the tremendous impact that your projected symposium
could have, the more strongly | feel that it should concentrate more narrowly .
on the biology of man, leaving his environment to another, probably equally
extensive discussion. More particularly, | believe that the time is right

for a restatement of the eugenic problem. Medawar's book ''The Future of Man'!
and the critical discussions that have followed its appearance give some idea
of the reawakening of interest in a ''new eugenics!''. The excesses of the
geneticism of thirty and forty years ago have led to an over-reaction which is
only just beginning to subside. My own views on this subject differ somewhat
from those of my colleagues = they are based to a large extent in my intuitive
confidence in the rapid advance of the technology of genetic control. ‘ve
should have some concern for the diisgenic evolution of the human species in the
longer term. However, | am more concerned that we will wake up one morning
very soon and discover that we have a powerful technique in our grasp Jong
before we Rave faced the issues of the objectives to which it should be directed.
For example, | would predict that it would not be more than ten or twenty years
before we have the technical capability of imposing a stage of autogamy and
homozygosity on the developing zygote or the germ line. This could permit an
evaluation of the genotype, as opposed to phenotype, of an individual that
would be the equivalent of many, many generations of rigorous selection against
so named deleterious recessive mutations. This expectation leads me to
discount the long range importance of the slow deterioration of the human geno=
type by almost any standard one would care to apply which must result from
current practices of ,.. selection and vulnerability.to mutation.

If | were still to comment on the topic you had suggested for me, it
might be on the theme that the impact of space on science tends to smack of
dévine revelation whether we think of the information that instruments or
astronauts may relay from the planets or in the longer range of communication
from other civilizations in the galaxy. But we can foresee discovery by revelation:
closer to Earth if we think of the computer as the deals ex machinae.