256 
situation as it is today that a very simple legislative package be passed 
extending these current standards to all activities in this country, that 
initially the focus be established and the responsibility in the Department 
of HEW, and that we proceed from there. But I hope we would not get into a 
recycling of discussions which occupied the attention of the Interagency 
Committee, including all relevant government agencies, for a number of 
months as we finally came down to make a single set of unanimous recom- 
mendations to the Administration for the purpose of legislation. 
It does not mean that this matter should not be touched upon, but I 
don't want it to occupy the totality of our discussion, because we are 
basically still concerned about the matter of proposed revisions to a set 
of guidelines which we now have, and that they include both the standards 
themselves as well as the matters of enforcement. 
Also, within that fourth section on implementation, there is plenty in 
the way of matters of generic concern with reference to the responsibilities 
of the investigator and the institution that can occupy us without being 
very specific in all instances, as to the locus of that regulatory activity 
if indeed we do acquire some kind of legislative solution to this problem. 
But nevertheless, I do regard it as highly relevant if you want to touch 
upon what I still view as an interim role of NIH until that still may come 
about . 
Now, with that brief preliminary and with the prayer that we may limit 
ourselves for the first round to about five minutes apiece, I would like to 
turn first to Ms. Rosemary Menard, who as you know is a member of the insti- 
tutional biohazards committee and a laboratory technician in the Department 
of Chemistry at the University of Washington. 
Ms. Menard. 
MS. MENARD: First off I would like to thank you for the opportunity to 
participate in these hearings. They have been of great general interest to 
me, and I would like to aim my remarks at several areas of general concern 
that I have that I feel have been raised by various public witnesses and 
members of the Committee during these hearings. 
First off, the first two are actually related. I would like to endorse 
Dr. Suzuki' s recommendation that it is the responsibility of scientists to 
educate the public, and I think that these hearings are one method of doing 
that, but I would like to see that effort expanded as much as possible. One 
way that I see that that kind of thing can be facilitated is to incorporate 
citizen participation in the decision-making process at every level, and I 
hope that in the Research Advisory Committee and various other committees 
of that kind of make up, that citizens can become more involved in these 
decision-making processes. I think that it is important to realize that 
people can deal with these issues. The Cambridge committee is a good 
example . 
[ 460 ] 
