128 
I shall focus here only on the general criticisms which may be made of 
the scientific basis of biological containment. 
The most obvious difficulty is that the experiments of Dr. Roy Curtiss 
have yet to be accomplished, consequently the scientific community has not 
had a chance to provide a critique of his experiments and to run independent 
checks. In saying this I am not at all questioning Dr. Curtiss' expertise 
or qualifications, but the unpublished experiments of the single scientist 
do not, in my opinion, constitute a body of knowledge shared by the scien- 
tific community which it is desirable to have as a foundation for guidelines 
In view of the serious nature of the risks entailed by recombinant DNA 
research, I would therefore recommned the following. First, a clear dis- 
tinction must be drawn between the problem of assessing the risk and the 
dangers of the research and the problems deciding whether the risks are 
acceptable. These two issues should be considered by a much wider range 
of people than hitherto, including those who have raised serious and re- 
sponsible questions about the research. 
It is important to avoid a one-sided predetermined decision. 
Second, it seems that a complete overhaul of the decision-making pro- 
cess at the national level is urgently needed. And before a final decision 
is reached on recombinant DNA, I would suggest that two committees to con- 
sider the separate questions of the nature and acceptability of the risks 
be set up prior to review and revision of the guidelines which have been 
drafted up to this point. 
The first committee should have a far more diverse membership than 
that of the present NIH committee along the lines suggested earlier. That 
committee would deal with the scientific and technical aspects. 
A second committee on the acceptability of the risks would have a very 
different composition, reflecting the ethical character of the question of 
acceptability. This membership should be drawn from a broad range of fields 
including the humanities, philosophy, ethics, policy areas such as law and 
administration, medicine and science. To provide a safeguard against the 
problem of conflict of interest an essential restriction would be that no 
member of that committee could be engaged in or have the intention of being 
engaged in the experiments under consideration. 
In general, I would advocate a slower and more cautious approach to 
recombinant DNA experimentation, and the maintenance of the moratorium 
until more is known about the risks. While in my opinion many of the 
claimed benefits are dubious, the risks seem relatively clear. 
[269] 
