31 
Dr. Philip Handler, President, National Academy of Sciences, in 
testimony before the Subcommittee on Science, Research and Technol- 
ogy, April 11, 197$ : 
The unusual history of this subject has laid upon those who 
would conduct this research the strange burden of offering a 
postive proof of “safety”, when the extraordinary risks they 
must show not to exist are entirely imaginary in the first 
instance. 
Not only are the risks of this research now considered to be too 
small for meaningful measurement, but there is general agreement 
that the benefits of recombinant DNA research are great. Again I 
quote “Science Policy Implications of DNA Recombinant Molecule 
Research.” Report prepared by the Subcommittee on Science, Re- 
search, and Technology, U.S. House of Representatives, March 1978, 
page vii : 
Immediate benefits of recombinant DNA research appear 
to be more imminent than the risks which have been hypo- 
thesized.” 
Dr. Maxine Singer, Head, Section on Nucleic Acid Enzymologyj 
National Cancer Institute at an NAS Forum: Research with Recom- 
binant DNA, March 7 , 1977 : 
The promise of the (recombinant DNA) method for the 
preparation of useful and otherwise unobtainable quantities 
of specific DNA fragments or genes is an established fact. 
For example, the gene for producing a type of animal insulin has 
already been introduced into micro-organisms by recombinant DNA 
techniques. The potential to produce human insulin, needed by dia- 
betics, by recombinant DNA techniques is great. 
A Dangerous Precedent 
To my knowelge, this bill represents the first case of the regulation 
of basic scientific inquiry, using the Interstate Commerce clause, and 
in an area with no proven hazard. The concept of “proscribed knowl- 
edge” is completely alien to the United States. Freedom of inquiry 
is as indispensable as freedom of speech, and this bill sets the pre- 
cedent of limiting freedom of inquiry when the need for such action 
has not been demonstrated. 
Federal Pre-emption 
I support portions of section 106, which provides that states and 
localities cannot regulate recombinant DNA activities, except in cer- 
tain cases. Indeed, many of my colleagues have indicated that they 
favor the bill only because this pre-emption section is included. 
Frivolous Suits 
Section 104 of H.R. 11196 is an open invitation to frivolous, time- 
consuming, cruel lawsuits. A well-known tactic used by certain groups 
to delay research and development is to bring suit in any court in the 
country which is known to be sympathetic to their stands. I know all 
my colleagues join me in disdaining the practice of “shopping around” 
for favorable courts, but I see the danger of this happening with en- 
[ Appendix B — 219] 
