174 
of this current situation would be acknowledged by the second condition that 
if no hazard can be demonstrated within, say, five years, the regulations 
should be automatically terminated. In that case we would return to the 
normal circumstances dependent on investigator integrity and personal re- 
sponsiblility for one's actions. I am aware that at least one project has 
been started to explore the hazards of this type of experiment. 
What I am recommending is that we set a time limit and if no hazard 
can be demonstrated in that time, we automatically terminate this unusual 
set of rules concerning experimental activity. If the hazards are as severe 
as some people suggest, it would be easy to demonstrate. 
Thank you. 
DR. FREDRICKSON: Thank you, Dr. Edgell. Dr. Edgell's revised state- 
ment is now being Xeroxed, and will be distributed to the members of the 
committee. 
Dr. Goldstein? May I call upon you for five minutes further? 
DR. GOLDSTEIN: This is from the February 8th document. 
DR. FREDRICKSON: Dr. Goldstein refers to the statement dated 
February 8th. 
DR. GOLDSTEIN: What I will do to try to get it into five minutes is to 
just summarize the first half of it, and you all can read it, I hope. Then, 
the last part of it is a statement from the critique we wrote, and I would 
like to read that. 
In the first part of it I tried to summarize a lot of the questions, 
and I think that will be most useful to people in the audience just to look 
at them to refresh themselves. Then there were two issues that I brought up 
Well, let me read something from the original — I guess the Wood's Hole 
guidelines, where they are referring to biological and physical containment 
barriers. The statement is, "The level of containment provided by these bar 
riers should match the estimated potential hazard for each of the different 
classes of recombinants. For projects in a given class this level should be 
highest at initiation, and modified subsequently only if there is a substan- 
tial change in the assessed risk or in the applied methodology." That is 
what we are hoping will be applied. That is from the Wood's Hole statement. 
Now in relation to that I think this committee should realize you are 
going to be setting two important precedents that were mentioned briefly 
this morning. The first is that your conclusions are going to be a signal 
as to the types of safeguards which will be taken by similar bodies in 
other countries throughout the world. Sidney Brenner made this point very 
[315] 
