M. Jack Framin, M. D. 
HI5) 313-5986 
i38 Calaipa Dri*e 
Atherton, Calif. 94025 
23 September 78 
Donald S. Fredrickson, MD 
Director, NIH 
9000 Rockville Pike 
Bethesda, MD 20014 
Dear Dr. Fredrickson: 
This letter is in response to the proposed revised guidelines as 
published in the Federal Register (July 28. 1978) and for which 
comments were solicited by September 27, 1978. 
On February 1. 1977, I appeared before the Stanford University 
Administrative Panel on Recombinant DNA Research ( the Biohazards 
Committee required by the NIH Guidelines) and read a statement 
regarding the general nature of the potential hazards connected 
with recombinant DNA research and with some specific matters as 
well. These matters were also covered widely in the local press at 
the time. In May, 1978 I appeared again before that committee and 
again raised some of the same points, but as of today no published 
response has been made by that comnittee. 
Since some of these matters are of general interest and others of 
greater local interest they should be of interest to you in 
reviewing the proposed revisions. These points are: 
1. The role of mistakes in scientific progress 
2. The role of ignorance in scientific progress 
3. Worker protection 
4. Conflict of interest 
5. Earthquakes 
I will deal with the last, earthquakes, first Isethat there 
is no mistaking its importance or relevance. 
5. EARTHQUAKES 
I said in February 1977, "It is generally agreed that since 
there may be danger in recombinant research, there must be containment. 
But Stanford is in earthquake country. I need not elaborate upon that 
fact to this audience. But what will happen to all of the little games 
being played in P2 and P3 containment if there would be a great big 
shake? You can write your own scenario as well as I can. What frightens 
me is the attitude of the preeminent DNA scientists who live here at 
[A-303] 
