72 Jane Street 
New York NY 1001 4 
(212) 675-7173 
Coalition for Responsible Genetic Research 
ADVISORY COUNCIL 
John S. Bird M.D 
Dr Irwin Bross 
Helen Caldicott M.D.* 
Dr. Liebe Cavalieri* 
John C Cobb M.D * 
Dr. Douglas DeNike 
Dr. Key Dismukes* 
W. Jack Frumin M.D. 
Solomon Garb M.D.* 
Steven Havas M D* 
Dr. Ruth Hubbard* 
Dr. Marvin Kalkstein* 
J.R. Kent M.D. 
Dr. Jonathan King* 
Dr. Sheldon Krimsky* 
Elliot Linzer* 
Pamela Lippe* 
Joyce Milton 
Lewis Mumford* 
Dr. Stuart Newman* 
Christine Oliver M.D * 
David Ozonoff M.D * 
Dr Barbara Rosenberg* 
David Straton M.D * 
Dr. George Wald*, 
Nobel Laureate 
Susanna Waterman* 
Dr Joseph Weizenbaum* 
Dr. Susan Wright* 
* Executive Committee 
MEMBERSHIP: 
PARTIAL LISTINC 
Walter Askinas M.D. 
David R. Brower 
Rev Roger Burgess 
Sir MacFarlane Burnet, 
Nobel Laureate 
Stuart Chase 
Citizens Rights Committee 
Glen C. Cobb M.D. 
Dr. C. David Elm 
William D. Furst M.D, 
Reverend David A. Furuness 
Mariano L. Galaineva M.D. 
W.B. Gamble Jr. M.D. 
F.M. Golomb M.D. 
Dr. Mario A, Gonzalez 
Harold J. Harris M.D 
Dr. Kenneth L. Jackson 
Father Walter T. Kelleher 
Hadley Kirkman M.D. 
Dr. Laura Kratz 
Henry D Lauson M.D. 
Dr. Herbert Manning 
Edwin F. Matthews Jr. 
Edward Miller M.D. 
Robert Murphy M.D. 
Maurice L. Origenes M.D. 
Dr. Aurelio Peccei 
Henry Pinkerton M.D 
Eliot Porter 
Dr. Jerome Prager 
Dr. Steven Price 
Sister Mary E. Reichert 
Abby Rockefeller 
Lewis M. Schiffer M.D. 
Solomon Garb M.D. 
Membership Secretary 
Francine R. Simring 
Executive Director 
June 19 , 1978 
Dr. Donald. Fredrickson 
D irector 
NIH 
Bethesda, Md. 20014 
Dear Dr. Fredrickson: 
I am writing in response to your letter of June 5, 
which was received at our office on June 13. 
Your comment that the Recombinant DNA Advisory. Com- 
mittee has primarily a scientific and technical 
responsiblity does not seem to me to answer to the 
requirements of the Federal Advisory Committee Act 
for a "balance of views"; not* to the need for ex- 
panded technical input from other disciplines such 
as medical microbiology, microbial ecology , epidemi- 
ology, etc. as mentioned in my previous letter con- 
cerning forthcoming Committee vacancies; nor indeed 
for the need to include representatives of Ithose 
persons directly involved in the laboratory support 
systems : technic ians , custodial personnel, et al. 
It is not at all clear why the NIH has been so re- 
sistant to suggestions that are already in quite 
successful operation, for example, in Britain. 
The central advisory committee there, the Genetic 
Manipulation Advisory Group (GMAG), screens recomb- 
inant DNA projects, supervises research protocols, 
and advises and controls. GMAG is a broadly repre- 
sentative group which includes representatives of 
the public interest, trade unions, bu siness, and 
non-biologists, along with recombinant DNA special- 
ists, safety officers from institutions involved in 
the research, et al. The primary responsiblity of 
this group is health and safety in the workplace.! 
Your wise comment made at the December meeting^that 
NIH would not want to regulate the research since 
its function is the promotion of the research might 
well provide an important key toward broadening the 
scope and view of the regulation of recombinant DNA 
activities. (GMAG regulates, but does not promote.) 
Alternative regulatory agencies such as OSHA and EPA 
might well be considered, as has been suggested from 
many sectors. 
If we are to have valid public participation in the 
decision-making process, public representatives and 
[Appendix A — 322] 
