1 
2 
3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
43 
of the Ni:i guidelines as a part of US DA policy, nei.ibers 
of the committee did express their concern for the 
extremely restrictive nature of the 1976 guidelines 
that particularly inpeded the application of recombinant 
UNA technology in agriculture for such projects as 
genetic improvement of food and fiber crops and the 
development of more useful and reliable biological insect 
control agents such as the baculoviruses and entono- 
pathoyenic bacteria in lieu of certain hazardous 
chemical insecticides. 
We are generally satisfied with the consid- 
erations that the NIH has given and incorporated into 
the revised guidelines, especially for those major 
suggestions for revision that were made to win as a 
result of the Airlie House meeting and tiie workshop 
on Risk Assessment of Agricultural Pathogens. 
We further not..*, with satisfaction, NIH's 
attempt to meet the concerns of agricultural scientists 
regarding the easing of restrictions for recombinant 
DMA research with plants, non-primate vertebrates, and 
invertebrates , and regarding the release of recombinant 
DNA-containing organisms into the environment. 
Although the NIH has incorporated a statement 
to the effect that the prohibition of deliberate release* 
into the environment of recombinant DNA-containing 
[135] 
