257 
I think the next two concerns that I have are basically on the questions 
of staff training and health monitoring. I think that we have heard some 
requests for better definitions and more support from the NIH on both of these 
things, and I would like to endorse those ideas as being very important in 
providing the maximum level of confidence in the workers who are dealing with 
these questions, regardless of whether or not there is any real hazard. We 
need these kinds of training programs, now, as soon as possiDle, in order to 
make sure that anything that is going on is being done under the best possible 
circumstances. 
The next thing that I am interested in is the communication between the 
local biohazards committees in order to facilitate an information exchange, 
and I would like to suggest that perhaps the NIH could serve as a clearing- 
house to local biohazards committees to help them to exchange information to 
deal with the various problems. It is the experience of the biohazard com- 
mittee at the University of Washington that we are making many decisions that 
are being made in various other biohazards committees across the country, 
and it would be very helpful if we could exchange information and deal with 
specific problems with the help of other people's experience as well as trying 
to just sort of generate all these things ourselves. 
The last thing that I really have some concern about was mainly touched 
on yesterday, and it was the discussion of the scientific data base for some 
of the Guidelines. I realize that basically differences of opinion in science 
is one of the things that makes science interesting, and that it is the way 
that science develops its bearings, and what have you. But I think that there 
was a significant amount of disagreement about some of the data that had been 
presented or used to help the Recombinant Advisory Committee to establish the 
Guidelines that I would like to see that kind of thing cleared up as much as 
possible in order to at least help the public feel more comfortable with that 
aspec t . 
DR. FREDRICKSON: Thank you, Ms. Menard. 
Is there one question or comment for Ms. Menard? Otherwise we can wait 
until we go around. 
I think it is perhaps wisest then that we move on, next to Ms. Menard, 
to Mr. Jon Beaty, who I remind you is a student member of an institutional 
biohazards committee, this time at the Oregon State University in Corvallis. 
Mr. Beaty. 
MR. BEATY: Yes, just to sort of pick up where Rose left off regarding 
conflicts in scientific data supporting certain proposed changes in the 
Guidelines, they do seem to be in some degree of dispute, but we have had a 
lot of information given to us in preparation for this meeting and during 
the meeting evidenced by a lot of the materials around us. 
Although it is not really germane to discussions of specific points in 
the proposed Guidelines, I think it is important to state for the record 
[461 ] 
