Recombinant DNA Advisory Committee - 10/16/90 
followed in this regard. 
Dr. Riley said she attended the meeting in Boston. She said the 
major issues were that the RAC should not only continue but 
expand its purview to the newer technologies, utilizing a more 
risk-based approach in considering all genetic modification 
issues, not just recombinant DNA. She noted that the 
representatives of local IBCs in the Boston area called for the 
RAC to continue providing them with advice and counsel in the 
performance of their duties. 
Dr. Atlas said the Boston hearing was interesting to him because 
it included social scientists and members of the general public. 
They expressed the view that although the NIH Guidelines were not 
regulatory in the same way that ERA and FDA would have regulatory 
authority, they were in fact adopted as part of local laws and 
ordinances. If they were sunsetted they would be locked in place 
and without a means for modification, these could be a crippling 
of investigation in the field. He noted that in general there 
was a call for continuation of the RAC. It was emphasized that 
the public involvement in the deliberations of RAC was what gave 
credibility to its actions. 
Dr. Atlas noted that IBC chairpersons in attendance had requested 
that the NIH Guidelines be republished to bring together the many 
amendments and modifications and they requested they be put 
together in a more readable form. He said the opinion was 
expressed that if the NIH Guidelines and RAC were sunsetted that 
this would cause unduly restrictive legislation and regulation to 
fill the void in oversight. 
Dr. Bourquin noted that the meeting pointed out the role that the 
RAC plays in bringing public involvement into all aspects of 
genetic sciences. There was support for RAC responsibility for 
the newer techniques in molecular genetics. 
Dr. Gellert echoed the points made by Dr. Atlas in regard to the 
sunsetting of the NIH Guidelines and pointed to the fact that if 
this were to take place, it would leave IBCs without guidance on 
novel problems that will crop up in research. The result will be 
divergent standards and investigators will "shop" their protocols 
among IBCs to avoid those IBCs who are more strict in their 
standards of review. 
Dr. McGarrity called on Dr. Childress to begin discussion of the 
New York City regional hearing. Dr. Childress said that many 
issues were summarized already by Dr. Atlas. He said one 
impression he was left with was the sense that the NIH Guidelines 
play an important role in public assurance and reassurance as 
well as promoting public participation in science. He said that 
[352] 
Recombinant DNA Research, Volume 14 
