169 
to the environment is perhaps of interest to people in industry, so I think 
the Advisory Committee, in granting these individual requests for exemption 
is going far beyond the case in question to paving the way for the day when 
there will be industrial exploitation of this as yet immature technique or 
technology. This transfer is a critical area which requires a lot of study 
and discussion because of the magnitude and the scope of its societal and 
environmental implications. I think the advisory committee system as it 
presently operates is perhaps ill-equipped to make these decisions, due to 
its domination by academic researchers. It may even be unprepared to ask 
all of the right questions. 
One of its more obvious weaknesses as far as composition of the Commit- 
tee goes, is lack of representation by relevant labor unions or — I guess 
labor unions should be represented, and on this we can go into more detail 
tomorrow as far as roles and responsibilities of the Advisory Committee and 
the biohazard committees are concerned. 
Two more comments regarding the discussion that took place earlier this 
evening. I think that the representative from EMBO, in describing the pro- 
cedure used for the British experiments with the animals, in which he said 
that information would be blocked until everything is accomplished, he said 
because the experiments themselves are open to misrepresentation. I think 
this is a key point. It applies to our situation as well, because while 
there may be some factual data base here, the interpretations you make from 
it are controversial, and they are open to interpretation and perhaps mis- 
representation. So I don't think we can rely on isolated personal opinions, 
even from very prestigious experts, to base our policy on. I think we have 
to recognize that since different conclusions can be drawn from the same 
data, that we have to make an aggressive effort to expose this data to a 
wide range of experts and the public. 
Also, what Dr. Rosenblith mentioned about the taxonomy of containment, 
I think also applies. We shouldn't abuse the various taxonomies there are. 
Also I think this can apply to the Advisory Committee set-up, because where- 
as the Advisory Committee may be named the same in Britain, I think it 
operates a little differently. As I understand, perhaps Susan Wright will 
comment on this, the Advisory Committee in Britain does have a representa- 
tive from a relevant labor union, and this represents an effort to incorpo- 
rate their perspective into policy decisions, so that perhaps we should be a 
little careful in comparing the British system with the American one as far 
as advisory committees go. 
DR. FREDRICKSON: Ms. Pfund, you spoke about the biohazards committees. 
We have, I think, three members of institutional biohazards committees here 
on this Committee. Are you a member of one? 
MS. PFUND: I asked to be, but I was — 
DR. FREDRICKSON: Have you ever attended a meeting of one? 
[ 373 ] 
