area and consider related ethical issues. The commission would be given a 
3-1/2 year life span. The Senate equivalent of the House NIH bill is currently 
bottled up in committee. It is uncertain whether the Senate can reach a compro- 
mise which would release the NIH bill. Morever, the Senate bill does not contain | 
language pertaining to the creation of a genetic engineering ccmmission. Should 
the Senate legislation pass, the House and Senate would have to compromise to 
design final legislation. It is not known whether the proposal to establish a 
genetic engineering commission would be part of that final compromise legislation. 
Dr. Nightingale pointed out that even if language establishing a commission on 
human genetic engineering is legislated, money would have to be appropriated 
for this purpose. She felt RAC might be confronted with a proposal to utilize 
recombinant DNA techniques in treating human genetic deficiences before Congress 
acts. Under this circumstance, RAC must decide upon its course of action. 
Ms. Joan Porter of the Office for Protection frcm Research Risks reported that 
the Assistant Secretary for Health forwarded a decision memorandum dealing with 
the issue of whether the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) should 
reactivate its Ethics Advisory Board. No action has yet been taken on that 
issue. In addition, Ms. Porter noted that the function of the Ethics Advisory 
Board as defined in the regulations is broad and could encompass a number of 
areas including recombinant DNA issues. 
Mr. Mitchell noted that although there may be at some future time other mechanisms 
to deal with these issues such as an Ethics Advisory Board or a President's 
Commission none currently exists, and no prediction as to when one might exist 
can be made. 
Mr. Mitchell said that RAC risks being criticized if it does not evaluate these 
proposals from an ethical standpoint. He felt such a criticism is voiced 
implicitly in the report "Splicing Life." 
I 
Mr. Mitchell suggested that the Working Group on Social and Ethical Issues 
attempt to develop some suggestions as to how RAC might deal with these issues. 
He offered the following issues for consideration by the working group. 
1. Should a risk vs. benefit type of review be instituted for these proposals? 
2. Should RAC constitute a working group on ethical and social issues for the 
purpose of reviewing these proposals? 
j 
3. Should working group review be conducted prior to RAC review, or should < 
the working group review ethical considerations after RAC has reviewed the 1 
proposal for compliance with the NIH Guidelines for Research Involving i 
Recombinant DNA Molecules? t 
;j t 
4. Should the Guidelines be amended to reflect RAC's recommendation that c 
legal, ethical, and social issues be considered in reviewing experiments t 
involving recombinant DNA and human genetic engineering? If so, how should ii 
the Guidelines be amended? 
t 
