MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY 
CENTER FOR CANCER RESEARCH 
77 MASSACHUSETTS AVENUE, CAMBRIDGE, MASSACHUSETTS 02139 
Room E17-539 
Tel. 617/253-3013 
September 12, 1978 
Dr. Donald S. Fredrickson 
Department of Health, Education and Welfare 
Public Health Service 
National Institutes of Health 
Bethesda, MD 20014 
Dear Dr. Fredrickson: 
This letter is in response to your letter of August 1, 1978 soliciting comments 
on the Proposed Revised Guidelines for recombinant DNA research. A careful study of 
these documents indicates to me that they represent a very positive development in 
the application of recombinant DNA techniques to problems of medical relevance and 
should be implemented without further revision at the end of the comment period. 
In particular I have been seriously involved in research into thalaseemia over the 
past nine years. Previous NIH Guidelines have essentially made it impossible to 
apply recombinant DNA methodology to the understanding of this serious, prevalent 
and life threatening disease. I am most encouraged that the Proposed Revised 
Guidelines would for the first time permit application of recombinant DNA technology 
to this important area of research. The impact of this change is especially great 
if we consider thalassemia in the context of other genetic diseases such as 
hemophilia, Tay-Sachs disease and sickle cell anemia. Information critical to 
either the understanding or potential therapy for these diseases can clearly be 
gained through recombinant DNA techniques and I look forward with great hope to 
the adoption of the Proposed Revised Guidelines so that this potential may be realized. 
In addition to the major benefit of opening new areas of research I believe 
that the Proposed Revised Guidelines rationalize the administrative structure required 
for recombinant DNA research which in the past has been cumbersome. These Proposed 
Revised Guidelines appear to deal prudently with the potential for risk associated 
with recombinant DNA methodology. I believe that the experience of the last several 
years of work in this area have made it abundantly clear that the risks associated 
with this work are much less significant than those projected by the most extreme 
critics of this technique. I support, therefore, the overall effects of the Proposed 
Revised Guidelines to lower the risk classification of many types of experiments. 
In conclusion, I believe that the Proposed Revised Guidelines and the associated 
Environmental Impact Assessment represent a rather complete consideration of the 
issues involved and I believe that these Guidelines should be adopted without delay. 
David Housman, PhD 
Associate Professor of Biology 
DH/srp 
[A-125] 
