Lapp4 
- 3 - 
Indeed, the environmental impact statement mentions the 
environment only once. Risk estimates are consistently downgraded 
by such misleading assertions as "there is no known Instance in 
which a hazardous agent has been created by recombinant DNA tech- 
nology." Exactly the same statement would have applied to uranium 
enrichment prior to the summer of 1945 when the first nuclear bomb 
was actually tested. (Recall that the whole era of recombinant DNA 
work Is no more than five years old!) 
In contrast, the guidelines represent a self-admitted 
compromise between caution and progress. To the credit of the 
drafting members, several categories of research which were deemed 
Intrinsically dangerous are barred outright. They Include (1) ex- 
periments In which recombinant DNA would be derived from certain 
pathogenic organisms or tumor-producing viruses; (2) deliberate use 
of DNA containing genes capable of producing toxins; (3) deliberate 
creation of recombinant DNAs from plant pathogens which would poten- 
tially Increase host range or virulence; (4) deliberate transfer of 
drug resistance of microorganisms which do not acquire It naturally. 
As a fifth caveat, the cosignatories banned any experiment using 
recombinant DNA technology which entailed release of the newly 
created organism Into the environment. 
It Is not clear whether this last proscription would In fact 
preclude doing the work to engineer new varieties of nltrogen-f Ixlng 
bacteria or put organisms Into human hosts which might synthesize 
critical biological molecules. Certainly the prohibitions of large 
Appendix K — 12 
