3556":

The potential for mis— se of knowledge has always gen nightmarish. But with he recent developments in enetics, the threat of dis— ster has never been so eal.

In fact, for the first 1mg in the history of mod- rn science, research work— rs concerned with molecular iology have called a halt 0 their studies for fear f the consequences .

And for the first time cientists are questioning heir common, and generally nspoken assuption, that the quisition of knowledge is lways an absolute good, re— uiring no justification or thical sanction. '

More than 200 eminent cientists recently conclu— ed an urgent conference at avos, Switzerland, on the mmediate dangers and pro- ected future benefits of enetic engineering.

Researchers have rea— ized that their latest~a- hievement —- the cracking f genetic codes -—-has 0- ened the way to the design— ng of new bacteria which re potentially more dan- erous to mankind than the tomic bomb. ‘

In 1953 at Cambridge Unis ersity, Dr. James Watson nd Dr. Francis Crick dis— overed that the pattern of 11 life forms is deter— ined by a double — helical cid ( DNA ). Genes are eredity.

Since then scientists ave found ways of cutting e long molecules into orter pieces and recom— ning them. These splic- gs are then incorporated to bacteria to create new 'croorganisms whose poten- 'al for causing disease in ants, animals, and man is t unknown.

In 1969 when three biolo- sts at Harvard Medical hool announced to the rld that they had succeed- in isolating a pure gene om bacterium, it was not thout some misgivings. though they felt their SCOVery could be used to re such hereditary dis- ' ses as hemophelia, thay rned of the dangers of

They feared they re unleashing on the

rld the same kind of

xed blessing as nuclear

m *1

They were not alone‘in

ir fears. soon aftefathe ouncement Maurice Wilkins 3 winner of.the Nobel

éimki‘sifiati c'réaflo‘ii

olecule of deoxyribonucleic:

ufm5¥914hediéine;-warned~~Mb

that the isolation of the gene could lead to the de- velopement of a major germ weapon. " It is the kind of thing you cannot trust so- ciety with," he said.

Again in 1972, Australi- an microbiologist, and Nobel laureate Sir MacFarlane Bur- net said he would, if he could, stop all experimen- tal efforts to manipulate the genes of viruses that in- flict death or grave ill-

TO'fif‘Biolbgicul limo Bomb "

A ~ afinmaafia «any: mam; .

nesses in people. The danger he said, was the inadvertant creation in the laboratoryof

sub — species of a devasta- ting virus against which humans would have no immun— ological defences.

" The possibility for good in these experiments are trivial improvements in vaccines, and not worth the risks," Burnet Said.

Despite the past warn— ings from scientists in the

C

,, g’he Gséreaféeete

u "A?!

9,;1975égpage 3

.. .r. .—

field, it was not until this summer that some kind of positive action was taken to look seriously at the poten— tial consequences of genetic engineering.

In July of this year, 11 American researchers, inclu- ding Watson, declared they were halting certain experi— ments in genetic manipula- tion of bacteria. Thei rea— son: if they do not stop they may accidentally loose upon the world new forms of life -- semi - synthetic or- ganisms that could cause e- pidemics, resist control by antibiotics, and perhaps in— crease the incidence of can— car.

In a letter published in Science magazine ( the maga- zine of- the American Asso— ciation for the Advancement of Science ) and in Nature, the British counterpart, they urged colleagues a- round the world to stop ex- perimentation with bacteria whose biological properties cannot be predicted in ad— vance. i

The group, chaired by Paul Berg, chairman of the Stanford University depart— ment of biochemistry, is buying time to consider ha— zards before rapidly devel- opeing‘research grows too large to be controlled.

According to Berg, the embargo is " the first I know of in our field. It is also the first time I know of that anyone has had to stop and think about an ex— periment in terms of its so- cial impact and potential hazard."

Many are unoptimistic a- bout the embargo holding. One National Institute of Health ( U.S. ) scientist says, " Anyone who wants will go ahead and do it." Although, he adds, the tech- nique requires a moderate degree of sophistication at the present, it will be a " high school project in a couple of years. "

Others are uncertain whe—

ther the ban will be ob— served by countries inter-

ested in the new technique's considerable potential in biological warfare. For ex— ample, many millions of dol— lars were invested at the' U.Sz Army's biological lao boratory at Fort Detrick, Maryland on trying to im- prove on the lethiality of viruses and bacteria harm— ful to man.

Controversy already sur— rounds every proposal put forth at the conference in Switzerland.

Scientists at the Univer— sity of British Columbia

Con't pg.4........