Decoding the Great Recombinant DNA Debate

The Gene-Splicing Wars: Reflections on the Recombinant DNA Controversy. Raymond A. Zilinskas and Burke K. Zimmerman, eds. Macmillan Publishing Company, New York, 1986. 288 pages. $24.95. Recombinant DNA became part of the vocabulary of scientists and the public in the 1970s. During that decade a fierce debate—not a war— on the biological hazards of rDNA research raged. Many of the scientists involved view it as one of the most anguished and bitter controversies in modern science. The rDNA debate was initiated by the molecular biologists leading the research, and within a year expanded to include the public. Fourteen key participants representing molecular biologists, government agencies, Congress, scientific societies, the media, and public policy reflect on the debate in The Gene-Splicing Wars. Well-known contributors include Donald Fredrickson, Zsolt Harsanyi, Harold Schmeck, and others. Their reflections provide not only an integrated personal record of the debate but, most importantly, a guide to more effective procedures for dealing with current and future technical issues. The debate began, with the 1973 Science letter representing the views of attendees at a Gordon Research Conference on molecular biology. "We are writing to you, on behalf of a number of scientists, to communicate a matter of deep concern...." the letter said. After the key meeting of scientists and lawyers at Asilomar, Fredrickson, who was director of the National Institutes of Health from 1975 to 1981, bore the responsibility for establishing the Recombinant DNA Molecule Program Advisory Committee and the NIH Guidelines for Research Involving Recombinant DNA Molecules. Looking back, he writes in the book, "Of course, I will have some biases, and this is the first occasion since leaving office that I have had to air them." Harold Schmeck Jr. of The New York Times reflects on why it was not until a year after the scientific-concern letter that the media finally communicated the issues to the public. These are only a sampling of the wealth of retrospective views. An appendix provides a description of the science and technology of rDNA for the non-molecular biologist. What have we learned from this experience? Initial concerns about hypothetical biological hazards have not been justified. As several contributors point out, not a single research biohazard has been demonstrated. Why has there not beer a title as dramatic as a 1976 article in The New York Times Magazine, "New Strains of Life or Death,' that emphasizes the accumulated record showing the low risk of biohazards from research in this area? Potential benefits of the 1970s are becoming realities of the1980s and 1990s; new natural drugs for heart attacks and cancer, and new bioproducts to improve the healthfulness of meat and decrease the cost of crop production are some examples. The remarkably favorable benefit-risk outcome might suggest that the debate was unnecessary and even a mistake. However, most contributors recognize the necessity of the debate, especially in the public arena. It is miraculous that the debate produced the timely establishment of guidelines rather than laws so that research could proceed without major delay. A prolonged debate that arrested research would have delayed the benefits for critical areas such as health and food. Delay or prevention of the advance of low-risk technology with major benefits is as risky as failure to delay high-risk technology with less favorable benefits. Science policy consultant Clare Nader's contribution, "Technology and Democratic Control: The Case for Recombinant DNA," is a 1980s continuation of the push to treat rDNA in the same manner as technologies with real demonstrated risks. To serve the people, public interest groups must understand technologies adequately enough to differentiate the real risks of pesticides, unsafe automobiles, contaminated meat, dangerous drugs, environmental pollutants, hazardous household products and nuclear power—all with demonstrated risks—from the yet-to-be demonstrated risk of rDNA. There are current issues in rDNA, including deliberate release of rDNA organisms, that might benefit from the experience reported in this book. For example, the basic strategy highlighted at the Asilomar Conference was to classify all conceivable recombinants as to their risk probability and to prescribe suitable risk-mitigating procedures appropriate to each. Such an approach might facilitate field research on vaccines, microbes, and plants recognizing that the field plots are a standard and necessary phase of agricultural research. The slow rate of approval for field testing of rDNA products documents the need for new approaches. This book will not only be of great interest to students and practitioners of molecular biology. It will also appeal to other scientists and the public who seek effective methods for maximizing technical advance and timely delivery of benefits while minimizing risks. A multiauthored book bringing together the reflections of key players, The Gene-Splicing Wars is of unique value. Hardy is president of Boyce Thompson Institute for Plant Research at Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14850 and deputy chairman of BioTechnica International, Inc., Cambridge, MA 02140.

Decoding the Great Recombinant DNA Debate

Interested in reading more?

Become a Member of