150 
1 interest should not be part of these committees. However, 
2 I am also a member of the public, and I would feel much 
3 more comfortable to know that there are scientists and 
4 epidemiologists, and biochemists who know something about 
5 recombinant DNA research who are making the decisions. 
6 Therefore, I think that scientists should be an important 
7 part of these institutional biohazard committees. 
8 Furthermore, it seems to me that the rules are 
9 set forth in such detail that I have very little worry 
10 about the uneven interpretation of these rules by different 
11 committees. 
12 I also like, I might say, the fact that there is 
13 now opportunity for case-by-case review of those things 
14 which don't fall into the general framework covered 
15 throughout the body of these revised rules. 
16 In general, I think the revised guidelines 
17 are therefore excellent, and I really hope that they 
18 will ultimately be revised right out of existence, and 
19 that someday, as they should be, people who work in 
20 recombinant DNA will be able to use just the established 
21 microbiological procedures — those that really fit 
22 the potential problems of recombinant DNA — which, it 
23 seems to me, more and more people are realizing are 
24 negligible. 
25 Thank you. 
[242] 
