STANFORD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER
STANFORD, CALIFORNIA 94303 ¢ (415) 497-5813

 

 

STANFORD UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE December 6, 1974
Department of Genetics

Instrumentation Research Laboratories

Elliott C, Levinthal, Director

Dr.sff McCullough

Science Policy hkesearch Division
Congressional Research Service
Library of Congress

Dear Dr. McCullough:

I was glad to have your letter of November 27 and the opportunity to
comment on your supplemental report one on " Genetic Engineering—Evolution
of the Technological Issue."

My most urgent reccommendation to you is to see if there is some way in
which this material might be held off until the holding of the International
Conference at Asselamar in February. I really am very much concerned about
the ammunt of inflammation that is being injected into this issue. I

would not suggest holding off for very long, but I am sure that there will
be a much more tempered presentation of the entire problem with the holding
of the conference. I realize that you arenot solely responsible for such
such questions of timing but I thought I would stress this information to
you.

My further comments have to do with items on particukar pages and have to
do mainly with some points of emphasis.

Page 4: About the definition of genetic engineering. What about the side
effects of other social policis, or the lack thereof, that result in
differential rates of reproduction of different genotype? For example,
Alexander Graham Bell pointed out in the last century that special education
for the deaf encourages intermarraige of the (sometimes genetically) deaf
since they are uniquely waable to communicate with one another by sign
language.

Actually the forst use I can find of the phrase genetic engineering was
in fact rather broad.

Page 8: The recommended halt was an interim suspension.. ‘The expression
“public health hazards of this research" may be confusing since so many
people are ready to ring the alarm about the acquisition of new knowledge
for which they believe the human race is as yet unprepared. This was
certainly not the intention of the committee and I believe be stressed
that it was possible side effects of the conduct of research not the ac-
quisition of new knowledge that was within their concern.

Page 97 As I think I stressed to you before my own view is that pre-empted

Y ¢ 'WQ00790199)
Dr. McCullough Page 2 December 6, 1974

abortion far outweighs other corrective opportunities at the level of the
gene. Of course we may find practical remedial or compensitary therapyes
that do not directly depend on the DNA sequence.

Page 10: I am enclosing a paper by Drs. Garamella which has been unfairly
overlooked as having provided some of the most important conceptual inputs
into the development of this final work.

Page 12: I have to say that the work that has been reported by Ledoux

and others on effects of DNA on higher plants is still highly controversial.
I am so far not aware of any single experiment that has been repeated in
more than. one laboratory.

Page 16: I must say to my own knowledge many members of the committee
have had considerable misgivings over the manifest over-interpretation
of their cautions.

Page 26: I trust that the conference will also go into the public health
costs of overdamping of research and may also go into the comparable problems
that face us in other areas of microbiology and even of international

travel whose potentiallity for imported new viruses impresses me as being

a far graver hazard than laboratory investigation. (Have you seen a recent
book "Fever" about the Lasa fever episode?) How will we ever defend our-
selves against such natural hazrads if there are severe impediments to
laboratory research on these pathogens?

Page 29: At the foot of the page I really wonder about the"severe and
adverse reaction which many peers$had given". Is that really true?

I know that there was a small amount of rather noisy reaction but I wonder
if that is a fair characterization. As to the question of the continuation
of research in relative secrecy this is an unfair allegation in view of

the considerable efforts of Dr. Edwards had made for years in publicizing
the opportunity and h&s intentions to proceed with these kinds of
investigation. If what you have inmmind is more publicity about individual
cases I think we must save some concern for the privacy of the particular
patients whose problems were at issue in the experimental efforts.

Page 37: About "alter course of human evolution” note my remarks vis-a-vis
page 4.

Page 32: I am appalled at the thrust of much of the new legislation which
threatens to single out experimentation as a crime per say without regard
to the material acts that such experimentation comprises. In California
today, under the laws concerning research on fetal material, it is evident
that procedures on a fetus that are dedicated to the acquisition of new
knowledge have been singled out in just that fashion while there are
essentially no restraints with respect to other manipulations of the fetus-
nor are there likely to be under the ruling of the Supreme Court. What an

ugly paradox?
\, Le
. Lo.
} i \ “
; GA, aa. AY
Me Pr—v~r /

f

?
Dr. McCullough Page 3 December 6, 1974

I hope it will be possible to emphasize that it is just in the area of
the engineering of DNA molecules and their insertion into microbes and
into plants that the payoff is just beginning to appear for the practical
application of studies on molecular genetics. We face crushing problems
on the area of efficient production of food, in the utilization of energy
and the extraction of mineral resources and it takes little imagination
to see what an important impact there could be in solving these problems
by the applicatin of carefully engineered microorganisms. I'm not
suggesting that we approach theseppossiblities with such enthusiasm that
we ignore the side effect hazards but I think it absolutely must be
pointed out that we cannot dampen research in those areas without paying
a very significant price in denied opportunities for the alleviation of
other problems.

I believe you have had in mind the following points quite generally but I
think they cannot have too much emphasis: the need to factor out, in
considezations of the law and wthics of experimentation a number of very
distinct issues:

1) Material side-effect hazards

2) the ethics of the experimental situation - as exemplified by
abortion

3) the implied dangers of knowledge per say ©@

4) the needs for the regulation of the application of new technologies.

incerely,

    

Joshua Lederberg