experiment is not currently possible at P3 levels of containment under the 
provisions of the existing guidelines. It could be readily done under 
the revised guidelines. 
In closing, let me say a few words about biological risk. Our Depart- 
ment of Biology at Yale covers a broad spectrum of the biosciences ranging 
from molecular biology to the environmental sciences. None of my faculty 
members have expressed concern over these pending revisions in the recom- 
binant DNA guidelines. Throughout the whole university, including the 
school of medicine, there is, in fact, broad and strong support for the 
implementation of the revised guidelines. I believe we should not lose 
sight of the fact that the risk associated with recombinant DNA organisms 
has not been established, much less measured or quantitated. On the other 
hand, the risks of disease, aging, birth defects are well established and 
altogether too real . 
The recombinant DNA technology can contribute in a major way to our 
understanding of basic biological phenomena; and this knowledge, in turn, 
is bound to provide practical ways of dealing with the very real medical 
problems of mankind. I believe that the implementation of these new, 
revised guidelines is in the best interest of the public--and that they 
should be approved at the very earliest time. I personally endorse them 
wholeheartedly. 
[ 406 ] 
