PEOPLES BUSINESS COMMISSION 
1346 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 1010, Washington, DC 20036, (202) 466-2823 
December 28, 1979 
Patricia Harris, Secretary 
Department of Health, Education and Welfare 
Washington, DC 20201 
Dear Secretary Harris: 
I write to present comments on proposed actions by you and the NIH relative 
to recombinant DNA research and development: 
* I oppose the massive relaxation of containment requirements pro- 
posed for the overwhelming majority of recombinant DNA experi- 
ments. This is especially inappropriate in light of recent studies 
which show that we have already created new pathways into the 
ecosystem for carcinogenic agents. (See Dr. Stuart Newman's letter 
to the NIH Office of Recombinant DNA Research in the Federal 
Register November 1st, page 63076, and "Recombinant DNA Policy: 
From Prevention to Crisis Intervention" by Dr. Susan Wright in 
Environment , November 1979.) 
* I protest the complacency and negligence of the DHEW and NIH 
in their failure to require mandatory compliance of safety provi- 
sions by private parties and corporations. This despite a vote of 
the Department's Recombinant DNA Advisory Committee calling 
for mandatory compliance. There is no evidence whatsoever that 
private industry can or will effectively monitor itself in the public 
interest —especially with regards to such an economically volatile 
technology. 
* I oppose any proposal to allow for industrial scale-up experiments 
before a comprehensive national genetic engineering policy is de- 
bated and implemented. 
The development of genetic engineering technologies is an enormous and 
awesome development not only for this country, but for all of humankind. 
It is unconsciounable that we have failed as of this date to even debate 
the implications of this issue which will within a few years affect every 
U.S. and world citizen. 
We are well on the way toward developing the science and industrial infra- 
structure for a bio-industry and for the practice of human genetic interven- 
tion. Yet there has been no attempt to determine the consequences of 
such a course for society. We have a patchwork of guidelines, advisory 
committees and policy whose creators are basing their efforts on hope, 
some good intentions and a tremendous amount of scientific and economic 
competition. This is not enough. Have we learned nothing from the recent 
history of the attempted development of nuclear power; about regulatory 
conflict of interest; about privileged treatment for private industry; about 
[ 615 ] 
