8 
Dr. Gottesnan said she was concerned with the question of how a biological 
weapon is distinguished from a chemical weapon. Seme items, v^ich would be 
defined by biologists as biological weapons, might be defined by others as 
chemical weapons. She suggested that any language added to the Guidelines 
might include some definitions of biologiced weapons. Er. Gottesnan sug- 
gested that language on biological weapons could logically be added at the 
very beginning of the Guidelines or at the beginning of Section III. 
Cr. Nightingale agreed; she suggested that the Guidelines might refer to 
the Biologic^d Weapons Convention and endorse it in principle and then 
indicate that the NIH Guidelines dead only with recombinant Dtft research. 
ftr. Baltimore said that after listening to the discussion, he had concluded 
that RAC should not add language on biological weapons to the Guidelines. 
The txeaty has been ratified by Congress and signed by the President. It 
is the law of the land. He suggested that RAC pass a resolution endorsing 
the treaty and indicating that reconbinant [KA technology is ewered by 
the Convention. 
Dr. Mason c^dled the question on Cr. Bedtimore's previous motion as amended. 
Dr. Bems seconded the motion. Cr. McKinney said that before the vote was 
taken. Dr. Baltimore should indicate where in the Guidelines the language 
would be inserted. Mr. ‘ITomton ruled that if Cr. Baltimore's motion was 
passed by the RAC, NIH staff would be given the responsibility for deter- 
mining the appropriate place in the Guidelines to insert the language. 
Mr. Ihomton said that his ruling was subject to appeal by the RAC. No 
appeal was made. By a vote of thirteen in favor, six opposed, and one 
abstention, the question was called. Mr. Thornton then called the vote on 
cr. Baltimore's motion, i.e., insertion into the Guidelines of the following 
language: 
"The use of reconbinant methodology for development of 
microbial or other biolog ic^d agents, or toxins, of types or 
in quantities that have no justification for prophylatic, 
protective or other peaceful purposes, is prohibited," 
By a vote of six in favor, twelve opposed, and two abstentions, the motion 
was defeated. 
Dr. Holmes said he wished to present an alternative proposal. He said his 
opposition to Cr. Baltimore's motion was not so much against the intent as 
against the language which was phrased in a negative way. He moved adoption 
of the following language, either as a resolution to the Director or am 
amendment to the Guidelines: 
"Use of reconbinant DNA methodology for development of microbial 
or other biological agents or toxins as biological or chemical 
weapons is prohibited, as specified by the 1972 Biological 
Weapons Convention." 
[ 467 ] 
