8 
Dr. Gottesman said the work inn group expects the investigator to determine 
which points are important in the particular propc6al and to provide rele- 
vant information to the working group and the RAC. 
Dr. Davis said less information should be required for review if the 
modified organism is identical or virtually identical to something found 
in nature. He did not think RAC should develcp a review system requiring 
a great deed of paperwork simply to relieve public anxiety over safe 
experiments. 
Dr. Lardy said RAC's attention to public concerns and anxiety has proven 
very beneficial; it is easier for RAC to modify its position than it is to 
reverse a court decision or legislation. Dr. Davis questioned whether 
widespread public concern actually exists or whether there is only a very 
vigorously expressed minority opinion. 
Dr. Rapp supported Dr. Landy's cement; in order to build public confidence, 
RAC should proceed slowly and err on the side of caution so that the public 
feels environmental testing of modified organisms is being carefully moni- 
tored. As experience and information accumulate, RAC might consider creating 
exenpt categories. 
Dr. Gottesman said the distinction between the method of producing an organ- 
ism and the product should not be loGt: because an organism is produced 
using reccrrbinant ENA techniques does not necesarily make it different 
from organisms derived by other means. A second issue is how environmental 
releases of any organism should be hand led . Dr. Gottesman said: "...we 
run the danger of trying to solve every ecological problem in the world in 
the name of recombinant DNA and in most cases that is not really what the 
issue is." 
Dr. Gottesman reminded the assembly that most genetic engineering using 
classical techniques and most transport of organisms from one location to 
another within the United States are not regulated. 
Dr. Landy cautioned RAC to avoid situations which might unnecessarily impede 
reccrrbinant ENA research. The public's perception of an issue is as impor- 
tant as the reality. If negative publicity is associated with transfer of 
an organism from one location to another, regardless of whether recombinant 
DNA is involved, that negative publicity may spill over to recombinant ENA 
research. 
Dr. Gottesman thought RAC should begin to think about how to educate the 
public about these issues. She suggested RAC's discussion and the points 
to consider should serve as the basis for future considerations of environ- 
mental testing proposals. The points to consider document will evolve as 
experience accumulates. 
Dr. Davis said about a dozen bacteria are now sold ccmmercially for agricul- 
tural and other purposes. He agreed RAC should proceed cautiously but was 
concerned RAC might overreact to a perception of public concern and subject 
modified organisms, no more potentially harmful than those now on the 
[ 128 ] 
