62 
1 legislation, passed this spring, to regulate recombinant 
2 DNA research in New York State. I have copies of that 
3 legislation also, if anybody is interested. 
4 The proposed guidelines under discussion today 
5 constitute a substantial downgrading in containment from 
6 the original NIH guidelines. My office believes that 
7 this reduction in containment levels is not warranted 
8 by scientific evidence, and is not in the public interest. 
9 That we have not as yet experienced any disease outbreak 
10 resulting from recombinant DNA activities is not proof 
11 of safety. There are no substantial facts or data to 
12 allay the fears of potential dangers which initially 
13 prompted the guidelines. 
14 We recommend that the original guidelines 
15 remain in effect. Among the areas that trouble us are 
16 the following: The proposed guidelines do not adequately 
17 take into account ecological impacts. A great deal of 
18 concern has been expressed over the possibility of 
19 creating an epidemic while the more likely possibility 
20 of inadvertently disrupting the ecological balance has 
21 been overlooked. A recombinant organism need not only 
22 produce a pathogen to cause harm. If an organism 
23 gains a slight competitive advantage by producing more 
24 of an enzyme than does the wild type, it could conceivably 
25 alter the balance of an ecological system with grave 
[154] 
