Recombinant DNA Advisory Committee - 10/16/90 
the NIH Guidelines in place and did not want to see the RAC 
sunsetted. There was a feeling that the RAC needed to continue 
to evolve. She agreed with Mr. earner's comments that the RAC 
should introspectively begin looking toward its role in the 
future and that the RAC Guidelines should be made into a more 
readable form. 
Mr. Brewer said the meeting in Bethesda merely reflected what was 
heard in other regional meetings with perhaps a bit more emphasis 
on the international implications of the NIH Guidelines , 
particularly as they relate to the European Economic Community 
and U.S. -Japan relationships. 
Mr. Mannix said he was unable to attend the meeting in Bethesda, 
however he suggested the RAC reconsider its role with the IBCs 
and shift its role from being a "parent" of the IBCs, to becoming 
a "council" of the IBCs, and that the IBCs themselves through 
this "council" be given more responsibility for effecting an 
evolution of the NIH Guidelines for the future. 
Dr. Robert Murray said that he was impressed by the clear message 
presented in testimony yesterday that the RAC should remove 
itself from review of environmental release experiments as well 
as the feeling that risk assessment become more product-oriented 
in the future. He noted that the consensus of the group which 
met yesterday was that the RAC should continue to exist and that 
the NIH Guidelines be kept in place. He reiterated the comments 
made by Mr. Brewer on the international aspects which were 
discussed. He said that one thing which was noted by nearly all 
the participants was the flexibility and adaptability that the 
RAC has possessed over its history and the feeling was that this 
was an important trait that any future organization, which may 
replace the RAC, should maintain. 
Dr. Robert Murray also noted that with respect to Dr. Parkman's 
letter calling for the need to begin to address germ line human 
gene therapy, that the RAC had already made a statement on this 
issue. "The RAC and the Human Gene Therapy Subcommittee will 
not, at present, entertain proposals for germ line alterations." 
Inclusion in the "Points to Consider" Document) He noted that 
this statement was made because of the strong negative reaction 
of groups who see eugenic implications in this type of research. 
He underlined that there was a strong negative feeling at present 
about germ line human gene therapy. He felt there was concern 
that to begin such a debate would lend credence to the fears of 
these groups that such experimentation would ultimately be 
undertaken . 
Dr. McGarrity said he felt this was a good recapitulation of the 
discussions which took place in the regional hearings and that a 
[354] 
Recombinant DNA Research, Volume 14 
