COVINGTON & BURLING 
Donald S. Fredrickson, M.D. 
March 3, 1978 
Page Four 
basically this type of theoretical risk that has been used 
to justify the relatively stringent control over recombinant 
DNA molecule research, as contrasted with other basic re- 
search that has gone unregulated in the past. It is impor- 
tant that consideration of this risk be kept entirely 
separate and distinct from the risk to an individual labora- 
tory worker, and that the two not be confused. 
Third, there is the risk that information gained 
from research on recombinant DNA molecules may ultimately 
be misused as, for example, a tool of war or terrorism. It 
is impossible to quantify or analyze objectively this risk. 
There is little scientific and technological research today 
that cannot theoretically be misused; certainly, people have 
succeeded in misusing a great deal of the most important 
scientific and technological advancements of our society in 
the past. I therefore find it impossible to base any public 
policy with respect to scientific research on the utterly 
conjectural contention that it could, in some way, poten- 
tially be misused in the future. Any public policy based 
on that premise would require that we disengage from all 
scientific and technological endeavor and indeed expunge 
much of what we have learned in the past. Thus, this form 
of risk is not, in my judgment, worthy of further considera- 
tion . 
Fourth, there are the many risks to individuals 
and to society as a whole from not proceeding with this re- 
search. To the extent that significant benefits can be 
projected, both directly from new products that can be pro- 
duced and indirectly from the new information that can be 
gained, we will all suffer harm if the research is unneces- 
sarily or unduly restricted or even prohibited. Lawyers 
are taught that the failure to act can be as culpable as 
direct action. The moral and ethical concerns, and risk to 
health, of the failure to pursue this very fruitful avenue 
of research must therefore also be considered in a far more 
detailed way than has been done to date. 
At the meeting, Dr. Schwartz criticized the risk 
analysis that has been conducted to date on research on re- 
combinant DNA molecules . When asked at the meeting to pro- 
vide his own assessment of the risk, however, he was unable 
to do so. The materials he provided for the record, more- 
over, simply criticized the risk assessment of others without 
offering his own risk assessment. Indeed, they question 
[Appendix A — 242] 
