32 
Health certain experiments which will be particularly informative with re- 
spect to the general hazards of the procedure. Thought has been given to 
such experiments. Dr. Wallace Rowe and his staff have been giving a great 
deal of attention to this problem, and it is not unlikely that in the rea- 
sonably near future such experiments will be undertaken, probably here in 
our own high-containment facility. 
Now a word about the guidelines. At our first meeting there was 
rather wild discord among the participants. I came home personally de- 
spairing that that we would ever come out with anything that would be use- 
ful. It has been a very interesting experience to me to see this committee 
take hold of a problem and finally behave as a committee and produce a 
document. 
At our second meeting it was determined that we could not draft the 
document in congress, and we therefore asked one of the members who had much 
experience in this business. Dr. David Hogness of Stanford, to chair a com- 
mittee, a subcommittee of four which would prepare a draft for discussion. 
Dr. Hogness did just this and produced a fine, workable draft in consulta- 
tion not only with the other members of this committee, but I believe, with 
Dr. Berg and with many other associates in the field. 
This was the document which was reviewed subsequently at Woods Hole in 
July, and at that point every clause in the document was discussed and was 
voted upon, and a second draft, which was called the Woods Hole draft was 
reached. This was distributed informally and elicited a rather massive 
mail response. I would guess on the order of 50 letters came to my office 
within the succeeding few weeks. The initial crop of letters quite uni- 
formly complained that the Woods Hole document did not impose adequate 
constraints. Curiously, as the weeks went by, the tone of the letters 
changed, and the later letters were almost as emphatic and of the opposite 
design. They were complaints that we had been much too stringent in our 
recommendations . 
It was clear that we were dealing with a situation in which there were 
many diverse opinions, and after consultation with Dr. Jacobs, Dr. Gartland, 
Dr. Talbot, Dr. Maxine Singer, and others concerned, it was determined that 
we had better have another go at it. 
Another member of the committee, Dr. Elizabeth Kutter was asked if she 
would prepare a revision of the document, and a third draft ultimately came 
out as a result of Dr. Kutter' s efforts and numerous consultations with 
various scientists in the field. Before we went out to La Jolla, it was 
clear that we had a fairly chaotic situation with three separate and dis- 
tinct drafts, and in order to accommodate to this Dr. Talbot undertook the 
heroic job of generating what I have called the Variorum Edition. Those of 
you who know Furness's Variorum Edition of Shakespeare will know what I am 
alluding to. 
[173] 
