Test-tube ‘re-evolution’: Can Congress cope? 
12-17-76 
B> Itohrrt < . < owrn 
Staff comvspondont of 
The Christian Si n-nee Monitor 
Washington 
As the new Congress considers the thou- 
md> i>f bills and problems to come before it 
ext year, it will have to give a little attention 
• what Prof l.it-bc Cavalicri calls the ‘Tc-cvo- 
i'ion of life on our planet ” 
The Cornell University biochemist sees this 
is the ultimate thrust of the budding tech- 
lnlngy of genetic manipulation - a technology 
that has lh<- potential to reshuffle the genetic 
inheritance of earthly life 
In the opinion of hiolngi-.ls, it also has an un- 
known |nilential to create life forms never be- 
fore known on this planet. - microbes that 
might lx- dangerous to earth’s plants and anim- 
als After a self-imposed moratorium to work 
out h.lMiratory safeguards to prevent escape of 
ncti iniemtu-s. mail) research groups now are 
n - nn:ng their uoil. But many experts do not 
n.r ;il- r emslii.S ,n the United States ade- 
’. i:ng this. Rep i.illx-rt riude (R) of Mary- 
•: r 1 i vs hills to r. gulatc this pew line of re- 
. i. . will e-roe up in l*«th Houses of Con 
• . r-e\» \e.ir To prepare lawmakers to deal 
it *t tins rmvrl I- i Hie congressional Knvi- 
r u.mi-iil.il Slu»l> ( i nfcieiicc, of which Mr 
is i m- inu'T joiiieii forces with the Sci- 
•■n* * s institute for 1‘iihhe Information this 
we: k to give legislative aides a crash course in 
••■si :-il>e genetic nianipu'ation 
Only grantees restricted 
Right now. regulation that docs exist stems 
from :• vrn*s of guidelines worked out by the 
y .'o.inl Institutes of Health (Nil!) and im- 
• i! on all research i s who work with NIII 
money 
'inese guidelines specify increasingly strict 
dan:! -ids of physical containment, depending 
•■n IV assumed ri*k m an experiment They 
f-div • from normal laboratory precautions to 
the la-rnietically se ded cnn-litions once used 
for ha logic al wa»f.in* laboratories 
hi addition. c-\|k ri merits considered rela- 
tively dangerous have to he carried out with a 
cc » 1 strain of bacteria believed unlikely to 
sm -. w if it did cseaj-c- The guidelines also 
prohibit expe-nments that might enhance the 
ability of microbes to produce poisons or In- 
crease the hazard from microbes judged dan- 
gerous to health 
While experts' continue to debate whether or 
not the guidelines are adequate, their real 
drawback - as Maxine Singer of NIII, one of 
their authors, explained - is that they have 
limitr-d authority NIII can enforce them only 
on its grantees 
Dr Singer said that the Department of De- 
fense. Energy Research and Development Ad- 
ministration. and National Science Foundation 
have also adopted the guidelines - and the De- 
partment of Agriculture may soon do so too 
That leaves a vast unregulated area, not only 
for academic researchers with other sources 
of funds but in industry, where many ex- 
periments are being made. 
Differences disclosed 
The other members of the briefing panel - 
Rolx-rt Pollack of New York State University. 
Robert Sinshcimer of the California Institute of 
Technology, and I)r. Cavalicri - agreed that 
wider regulation is needed. But Drs. Sinshei- 
mer and Cavalicri emphasized that they repre- 
sent a more conservative view than many of 
the: colleagues would support 
For example. Dr. Singer said she thinks rele- 
vant agencies, such as the Center for Disease 
Control, already have enough authority to im- 
pose the needed regulation, if they will exert 
themselves. While favoring creation of a na- 
tional commission to examine the issue, she 
urged exploring what can be done under 
present law. before Congress enacts special 
control legislation. The other panel members 
disagreed, saying they couldn't see existing 
agencies doing an adequate job. 
Dr. Sinshcimer went further. He would sub- 
stantially tighten the NIII guidelines to limit all 
experiments with unknown gene recombina- 
tions to the most stringent physical contain- 
ment. license ownership, and use of the special 
chemical reagent needed for this work. He also 
urged that researchers be encouraged to con- 
centrate on evaluating potential dangers, 
rather than rushing ahead to see what new 
cimhinations of genes they can construct. 
Dr. Cavalicri would go even farther, requir- 
ing inspection of the laboratories and li-g.dlv 
limiting experiments to merely evaluate 1 !: the 
hazards 
Dr Pollack objected that such a severe limi 
tation on research and restriction to a few- >•: 
per-isolatcd facilities would virtually exclude 
young scientists from this research field, 
which promises to be one of the main avenues 
for understanding genetic s for many y« rs to 
come 
All the panelists pointed ou! that many bi-do 
i-i is twlieve the present saferpiatcU and 
gm- d ri-'-d.ition to l»o more than ubpiite 
H*ev i-o -lr n- intcrfereni - \dh the-*- 'nr 
r *f — »•; I fre» -»m of r ■• earth - a wpm-: ? 
• p: • n!« d on the panel C’\< :h»; ■v»c 
-|-c ••! aMi’nde. I' -t tube j»ree <b ;ff?!?”» no.v.i 
ir ?- r way in mjny laboratories Dr sjpvhe. 
mcr pci|»M;:l - d the number 1o V *'» or If) fron 
his own direct knnv.lodeo. rg.idi'v agro-- 
with ?tr Singer that this c- 'imn'o f’vght • 
h- far too low 
KEEPING WATCH ON DEOXYRIBONUCLEIC ACID/NYTimes / 2- 20- 7 7 
By Harold m. schmeck Jr. 
WASHINGTON — "Recombinant DNA research” is 
a subject so abstruse that until recent years, it was 
seldom mentioned beyond the biologist’s laboratory. 
But now there have been public hearings in Cam- 
bridge. Mass., Ann Arbor* Mich, and other cities. 
There is legislation before the state of California 
and the United States Congress and the prospect 
of hearings here soon in the Senate. This uncommon 
subject for public debate and legislation is the chemi- 
cal called deoxyribonucleic acid — better known as 
DNA. It is the master chemical of heredity. It dictates 
what every living cell can make, do and become 
because DNA is the message-bearing substance of 
the genes and chromosomes in all living things. 
The current debate is over the question of restrict- 
ing experiments in DNA research and even prohibit- 
ing some experiments altogether. The scientists 
themselves called for a moratorium on auch work 
in 1974 while they considered the balance of risks 
and benefits and tried to define safety guidelines. 
The discussion has arisen because scientist* have 
now devised ways of altering the genetics of -living 
things in ways that may possibly go far beyond 
what nature has contrived. They are learning how 
to splice into the native DNA of a living cell i 
segment of foreign DNA which might give Uiat cell 
traits and capabilities it never had in nature. Genes 
of man or animal could be spliced into the genetic 
apparatus of plants or bacteria or vice versa. As 
a tool for studying life, gene splicing seems to have 
immense promise even though it is not clear that 
the transplanted genes would always function the 
way they did in their original home. 
Bacteria Made to Order 
On the ^racucal side the potentialities of recombi- 
nant DNA work seem revolutionary. One' might, for 
example, design bacteria that would gobble up pe- 
troleum from oil spills. Other microbes might be 
turned into living factories for producing vitally 
needed substances such as insulin or human growth 
Copyright © 1976/77 by The 
New York Times Company. 
Reprinted by permission. 
agent has been created by recombinant DNA tech- 
nology " 
No practical T efit has yet been realized either, 
but enough exp. " ments have been done with bac- 
teria to show thui this is a technique of real power. 
Transfer of genes from one bacteria! species to an- 
other has been accomplished, although this is not 
surprising considering that bacteria can do it them- 
selves without human guidance. In some of the lab- 
oratory experiments, however, much larger jumps 
across species lines have been achieved deliberately 
— transplants of genes from fruit flies, toads and 
even rabbits into bacteria. 
In other genetic manipulations, cells of tobacco 
plants have been fused with human cancer cells to 
form hybrids containing some genes of each. Such 
studies have been useful primarily in studying the 
action and control of genes. No science fiction 
progeny have emerged from the test tubes. Clearly, 
however, there is a need for safety rules and a need 
for everyone involved in the research to obey them. 
Last year, after much study and the airing of con- 
flicting views, the National Institutes of Health pub- 
lished strict guidelines to govern recombinant DNA 
experiments in all research the institutes helped sup- 
port. By now the guidelines have been adopted, or 
are about to be, by every Federal department believed 
to have any direct interest in recombinant DNA Re- 
search. 
Senator Dale Bumpers. Democrat of Arkansas, has 
introduced a bill requiring licensing of institution* 
doing recombinant DNA research and giving the De- 
partment of Health, Education and Welfare national 
regulatory powers over the field. Senator Edward 
M. Kennedy. Democrat of Massachusetts, who had 
been a congressional leader in concern over recombi- 
nant DNA studies is planning hearings this spring. 
And the state of California is considering a bill that 
hormone. The genetics of plants nught be engineered ^ ^ 
to make some important food crops fix their own 
nitrogen for fertilizer. 
Any of these accomplishments, if achieved, could 
confer profound benefits on mankind. But each such 
potential boon is matched by a comparable theoreti- 
cal catastrophe. 
What if the postulated oil-gobbling bacteria got 
loose and became a contagious disease of automo- 
biles. aircraft and all other machinery lubricated by 
oil? What if the insulin-producing bacteria learned 
to thrive inside humans and. somehow, sent every 
infected person into insulin shock? What if sciential* 
inadvertently produced a super germ or a super weed 
recombinant DNA research within its borders. 
In Cambridge, the city council, which has heard 
a long and sometimes acrimonious debate over DNA 
research during the last several months, finally voted 
against banning such studies at Harvard University 
and Massachusetts Institute of Technology. The 
council adopted an ordinance setting up strict guide- 
lines for construction of a laboratory at Harvard 
for the research. 
Inevitably some scientists think public concern 
over recombinant DNA research has been blown out 
of proportion by the science-fiction aura that seems 
to color it. But one thing seems clear: If other areas 
capable of upsetting the entire balance of life on of biological research are also potentially hazardous. 
ea J ^9 they have not struck the public as subject for regula- 
To date all of the harmful possibilities remain li °n and restriction, 
entirely potential and theoretical. "It should be em- — 
phasized," said a recent Government report, "that Harold M. Schmeck Jr. reports on science for The 
there is no known instance ra which a hazardous New York Times. 
Reprinted by permission from The Christian Science Monitor . Copyright © 
1976 by The Christian Science Publishing Society. All Rights Reserved. 
[ 893 ] 
