VI 
U.S. MUST DETERMINE ITS CWN STANDARDS 
"Recombinant safety standards should not be based, tacitly 
or explicitly, cn v^at our standards may, or may not, mean 
for safety standards abroad " 
NIH may be excused (if not lauded) for hastily promulgating its guide- 
lines, in part to induce such guidelines abroad, without environmental irrpact 
requirements that it is now undergoing. But, ultimately, the U. S. must distin- 
guish sharply between what we require at home for public safety and what is 
required abroad. Although public health is often a global problem:— as in small 
pox or influenza — we do not lower our own standards of what is necessary here 
by arguing that others will not take further precautions in parallel. It is 
argued that others will be so turned off by our regulation as to adept less 
stringent standards than might otherwise have been the case. But these (implaus- 
ible?) speculations are, in any case, irrelevant to our public health process. 
Sincerely, 
remy J. Stone 
In conveying comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement, 
you may record me as follows on the points you mentioned: 
I. For Agains t : The Only Solution lies in Even-Handedness. 
OMyiENrS: 
II. Fo r Agains t ; Informed Regulation Must Not Become Self-Regulatiai. 
CX>MENrS: 
III. For Agains t : Convenience is not a Public Health Standard 
CCMffiNTS: 
Appendix K — 44 
