Asilomar
Gene transfer provoked a great deal of discussion about the ethics of
recombinant techniques and their social consequences. Perhaps some
of this discussion was due to the rise of ecological consciousness in the
United States in the early 1970s, and perhaps some was due to
journalistic lapses and oversimplifications. Nonetheless, the ability to
transfer genetic material from one organism to another had important
implications for human safety. Public concern certainly played a role in a
moratorium geneticists imposed on recombinant DNA techniques.
In the summer of 1971 researchers planned studies with SV40, a
monkey virus that can induce cancerous growth in monkey and human
cells. The news media drew attention to plans to introduce DNA from
this virus into bacterial cells of Escherichia coll. These bacteria are
present in the human intestinal tract, and if these experiments went
wrong, it was possible that pathogenic bacteria could escape from the
laboratory and kill humans who lived nearby. The techniques of DNA
transfer opened up a staggering number of possibilities of gene
combination. Because of public reaction to this new horizon of science,
SV40 research was postponed. In fact, in 1973 and 1974, prominent
scientists, including a committee of the National Academy of Sciences,
called for a temporary halt to such studies until safety and procedural
issues could be addressed.
In 1975 the National Institutes of Health sponsored a conference at
the Asilomar Conference Center in California, entitled "International
Congress on Recombinant DNA Molecules." Biologists, physicians, and
attorneys met to discuss the safety of recombinant DNA research,
focusing not on ethical issues of genetic alteration but on safety and
public reassurance. Numerous questions were addressed: could
dangerous pathogens escape into the environment? would
recommended guidelines be enough to protect workers and the public,
or were formal regulations required? The conference concluded that
such research could go forward, but only after certain safeguards were
implemented, including sterilization and containment mechanisms.
Study Questions
1. The conference at Asilomar was held at a time when recombinant
DNA techniques were new, but no harmful transgenic organisms had
been created and released into the environment. As no harm had been
done, is it possible that the public and researchers panicked and
imposed an unnecessary moratorium?
2. The moratorium on recombinant DNA study is virtually without
precedent in scientific history. Are there other domains of research that
might benefit from a moratorium until guidelines and/or regulations are
developed to deal with potential problems? What factors would have to
be present for a moratorium request to be successful?
Adapted from Marcia Baranaga, "Asilomar Revisited: Lessons for
Today?" http://www. blotech-info.net/asilomar-revisited.html.
From: Case Studies in Biomedical Research Ethics Timothy F. Murphy