5 
"For the future, scientists need to continue, together with federal 
and local governments, to evolve policies that offer protection fron 
potential hazards and preserve opportunities for discovery and 
develcpment of safe and desirable ^plications. Scientists must 
share their insights into the nature of living things with increasing 
numbers of people so that debate can be predicated on understanding 
rather than fear. In order to counteract the growing pessimism 
about the nature of knowledge, the proper separation of science fron 
technology must be made and, in the continuing dialog, the distinct 
values and problems inherent in each must be carefully articulated. 
Finally if scientists commit themselves to their unique opportunities 
to serve as an early warning system, society can progress with prudence 
and caution as scientific knowledge grows." 
In the Recombinant ENA Advisory Committee, an effort has been made to allow 
the public to have an input into recommendations vAiich affect not only science, 
but the public as well, without unduly restricting the research v^ich the 
public interest requires that we pursue. 
The argument that guidelines for the conduct of publicly funded research are 
not needed because nothing more dangerous than now exists may be developed by 
this technology is beguiling, but false on two counts: 
First, human experience has shewn that any tool powerful enough to produce 
good results of sufficient inportance to shake Wall Street and offer hope 
of treating diabetes is also powerful enough, wrongly used, to produce bad 
results of equal consequence. 
[ 612 ] 
