f ME Nj- 
Letter of invitation to representatives of private industry 
to June 2nd meeting 
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE 
FUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE 
NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH 
BETHESDA. MARYLAND 20014 
MAY 17 1976 
Dear 
As a follow-up to the telephone call you received from us, I am writing 
to invite you to attend an informal meeting to exchange information 
and discuss forthcoming National Institutes of Health (NIH) guidelines 
on research involving recombinant DNA molecules. The meeting will be 
held at the NIH campus in Bethesda, Maryland. It is scheduled for 
Wednesday, June 2, from 9:30 A.M. till adjournment in Building 31, 
Conference Room 7. I have invited several other representatives from 
industry to join us in this discussion. 
Approximately two years ago, scientists engaged in recombinant DNA 
research voluntarily called for a moratorium on certain experiments to 
assess potential hazards of this research and to devise -appropriate 
guidelines. Through their efforts, the National Institutes of Health 
and the National Science Foundation supported a conference sponsored 
by the National Academy of Sciences which was held at the Asilomar 
Conference Center in California in February 1975. Their actions also 
led the NIH to establish an advisory committee to develop guidelines 
for recombinant research funded by the NIH and to devise programs for 
assessing and controlling hazards in such research. After a year's 
work, the committee in December 1975, proposed guidelines for the NIH 
to govern DNA recombinant research. 
The proposed guidelines were reviewed at a special meeting of the 
Director's Advisory Committee held at the NIH on February 9-10, 1976. 
The meeting afforded an opportunity for the scientific community and 
the public to comment on the proposed guidelines . I have been reviewing 
these guidelines in light of the comments and suggestions made by the 
participants at the meeting as well as the written comments received 
after the meeting. A number of issues of special concern to the 
commentators were reviewed, at my request, by the advisory committee 
that developed the guidelines. I have under review the responses of 
the committee. After my review is completed, I plan to issue the formal 
guidelines with an analysis of my decision, perhaps in mid-June. 
[ 424 ] 
