1226 
THE NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE 
May 1977 
The iNew England 
Journal of Medicine 
Official Oigan of 
The Massachusetts Medical Society 
John J. Byrne, M.D., President 
Lamar Soutier, M.D. Everett R. Spencer, Jr. 
Acting Executive Vice-President Executive Secretary 
Published Weekly by the Committee on Publications 
of the Massachusetts Medical Society 
Claude E. Welch, M.D., Chairman 
John C. Ayres, M.D. James F. McDonough, M.D. 
Bentley P. Colcock, M.D. John I. Sandson, M.D. 
Franz J. Ingelfinger, M.D., Editor 
Associate Editors 
Jane F. Desforges, M.D. Ronald A. Malt, M.D 
Arnold L. Smith, M.D. Norman K. Hollenberg, M.D., PhD. 
Genevieve MacLellan, Book Reviews 
Robert O’Leary, Senior Assistant Editor 
Joseph J. Elia, Jr., Assistant Editor 
Editorial Board 
Benjamin Castleman, M.D. 
George F. Grady, M.D. 
Robert E. Johnson, M.D. 
John P. Merrill, M.D. 
William Silen, M.D. 
Eugene Braunwald, M.D. 
George P. Canellos, M.D. 
Armen H. 
Richard W. Erbe, M.D. 
Seymour Reichlin, M.D., Ph.D. 
Leroy Vandam, M.D. 
Jerome S. Brody, M.D. 
Edward J. Goetzl, M.D. 
William B. Hood, Jr., M.D. 
Robert C. Moellering, Jr., M.D. 
hjian, Jr., M.D. 
Milton C. Paige, Jr., Business Manager 
William H. Paige, Manager, Subscriber Service 
Authors preparing manuscripts for submission to the Journal 
should consult “Information for Authors.” This material may be 
found in the first issue of every volume of th e Journal, or it may be 
obtained from the Journal office. The entire manuscript, including 
references, should be typed double space, and all material, in- 
cluding figures, should be submitted in duplicate. 
Case Reports, usually published in the “Medical Intelligence” 
section, should include only the pertinent details and reference to 
articles reporting closely related cases. A very' short case report or a 
description of a technic submitted as a “Brief Recording” should 
be limited to 500 words. 
Material printed in the New England Journal of Medicine is 
covered by copyright. The Journal does not hold itself responsible 
for statements made by any contributor. 
Notices should be received not later than noon on Monday, 24 
days before date of publication. 
Reprints: The Journal does not stock reprints (no reprints of 
MGH CPC’s are available). 
Althouch all advertising material accepted is expected to con- 
form to ethical medical standards, acceptance does not imply en- 
dorsement by the Journal. 
Subscription Prices: S22.00 per year (interns, residents S16.00 
per year; students $12.00 per year). U.S. funds only. 
Microfilm volumes available to subscribers through University 
Micrpfilms, 313 N. First St., Ann Arbor, MI 48106. 
Address communications to the New England Journal of 
Medicine, 10 Shattuck St., Boston. MA 021 15. ___ » 
4- ! I- F. D 
PUBLIC-HEALTH POLICY AND 
RECOMBINANT DNA 
The issue of recombinant DNA research (i.c., gene 
manipulation) has been discussed widely in (he pub- 
lic press and scientific journals. The controversy has 
been the focus of numerous meetings sponsored by the 
National Institutes of Health and most recently by the 
National Academy of Sciences. It is regrettable, there- 
fore, that the report in this issue of the journal by C. 
Cohen completely ignores the central queslions in the 
debate. It dismisses potential hazards associated with 
the technology while attempting to lay down a priori 
principles on which to make judgments of little rele- 
vance. The report is an entertaining intellectual exer- 
cise with no bearing on the facts involved. Worse yet, 
Cohen demonatrates a lack of understanding of sci- 
ence and its history, and particularly of the specifics of 
recombinant DNA research. The real issue — a de- 
termination of sound public-health policy taking into 
account both potential benefits and hazard:. — is not 
addressed. Ilather, the bulk of his thesis revolves 
around questions of complete prohibition, a position 
not shared even by critics of the research whose views, 
in my opinion, he so distorts. Cohen seems unaware of 
the difference between reasonable constraint, a view 
espoused to varying degrees by most of those on both 
sides of the debate, and absolute prohibition. This 
view sets back the controversy instead of construc- 
tively helping to define the issues. It is a disservice to 
the proponents of the research who have struggled so 
diligently at self-regulation. 
Recombinant DNA technology makes it possible to 
remove DNA from any organism, to chop the DNA 
enzymatically into smaller sequences of genes, to 
splice these genes into an appropriate vector (usually 
a virus or plasmid), and then to use the vector to in- 
fect an animal, plant or bacterial cell of choice. The 
end result then is the insertion of the foreign genes of 
interest into a new host. This revolutionary technic 
permits genetic information to cross species barriers 
readily. It has allowed genes derived from animal cells 
and their viruses to be implanted into bacteria, and 
bacterial genes to be inserted into animal cells. The 
usual “time gap” (a potential safety valve) between a 
fundamental discovery in basic science and its appli- 
cation as a technology disappeared in record time 
with recombinant DNA studies. With its capacity to 
rearrange the genetic heritage of millions of years of 
evolution, this technology appears to offer a power to 
transform living organisms comparable to the power 
of nuclear fission to transform matter. 
Recombinant DNA technology will have profound 
effects on biomedical sciences, industry and society at 
large. There is indeed the potential for benefits of 
large magnitude. With regularity, bacteria are now 
being implanted with nonbacterial genes. These genes 
are then reproduced as the genetically modified bac- 
teria reproduce, thereby making it possible to obtain 
the gene products for which the implanted genes code. 
Jijjj ' 0 1977 [Appendix C— 91] 
