The Chemical World This Week
AAAS MEETING: A CALL FOR NEW ATTITUDES A call to the science and engineering communities to rise to meet the public's image and expectations of them. And practical advice for scientists on dealing with Congressional legislators. Befittingly for a meeting in Washington, D.C., the American Association for the Advancement of Science at its 144th national meeting last week was the target of these remarks from scientists in government. The remarks came from the White House's Office of Science & Technology Policy director Frank Press and Congressman Mike McCormack (D.-Wash.), chairman of the Subcommittee on Advanced Energy Technologies & Energy Conservation Research, Development & Demonstration. Speaking at a AAAS public lecture, Press noted recent public opinion surveys indicating a continuing, if not growing, high regard for scientists and engineers. It may be time, he says, for some new attitudes and actions on the part of the science and engineering communities. "Among them," Press says, "must be a new spirit of self-renewal and cooperation among our professions, a new self-assertion and positive attitudes about our future roles, a new confidence in the future creativity of science and technology." A result of this change, Press says, is that "we may just find that the hard support—the federal budgets pro-
Press: spirit of self-renewal 6
C&ENFeb. 20, 1978
In a study to be conducted with the posed and the Congressional appropriations and authorizations ap- Department of Commerce, he says, OSTP will examine such things as the proved—will grow accordingly." Supporting his contention, Press impact of federal regulations on innotes that not to meet the demand for dustry, the availability of investment extension and application of human capital, and the assertions that inknowledge does not mean limiting dustry is becoming increasingly degrowth or moving toward any kind of fensive in its R&D. It also will be stability. "In the dynamic world we considering ways to change the sithave created, it means fomenting uation, he says. human misery, economic collapse, McCormack calls on scientists to social upheaval, and, at worst, war." get more deeply involved with their Press says that during his contacts Congressional representatives. Indiin Washington in the White House, viduals or select groups get involved, the agencies, and Congress, he has he notes, when their activities are been encouraged by the attitudes he's specifically threatened or their scidiscovered toward science and tech- entific integrity criticized. However, nology. There is an underlying con- he says, resulting victories are usually fidence, he says, in the ability of the limited and transitory. This happens, science and engineering communities McCormack says, because energy to search out answers to these prob- experts, for example, generally fail to lems. Among the areas where the come to the assistance of geneticists, greatest contributions can come from and vice versa. science and technology, Press cites The demands on a Congressman's the economy, energy, agriculture, time and attention, McCormack says, climate, environment, and health. far exceed what most outsiders can As for the economy, Press notes imagine. Thus, to avoid any inhibithat many economic analyses raise tion of objectivity when an issue with doubts about the ability of the U.S. to a significant technical content arises, maintain the vitality of future eco- McCormack suggests that scientists, nomic growth. But, he says, such as individuals, should meet with their growth is not only essential to do- Congressmen about four times a year mestic well-being but is a keystone to in their home districts. global economic progress. McCormack's suggestions are Productivity growth is rising in the somewhat similar to the approach developing countries, while it is slip- being attempted by the American ping in the advanced countries, Press Chemical Society's science counselor points out. Many intermediate and program. He suggests that individual even some high technologies are being scientists should undertake to create, adopted successfully by developing countries, that, on some items, now can compete successfully. But as the transfer of technology and industrial capacity takes place at one level, it is essential that the advanced nations continue to advance in their innvation and productivity. "Otherwise," Press says, "major markets will begin to collapse around the world, we will be resorting to protectionism instead of industrial creativity to save our domestic economies, and eventually global economic chaos will ensue." Against this background, Press points to the crucial need for innovation and thus to the Administration's concern with the state of industrial R&D in the U.S. The Administration, he says, will be focusing much attention on it in the coming year. McCormack: deeper involvement
with their colleagues, informal committees to call upon and work with their Congressmen; that the group include representatives of several disciplines as well as those who form political opinion such as newspaper editors; that a continuing relationship with the Congressman be established; that the group learn what members of the Congressman's staff advise him or her on issues involving technical or scientific questions and meet with such staff persons. "If you do this," he says, "then if an emergency situation arises, such as a vote on legislation to ban DNA research, you will be able to call your Congressman on a first name basis and have him respect and possibly accept your recommendation. " D
Recombinant DNA bill readied for Congress Draft bills to regulate recombinant DNA activities in the U.S. have enjoyed long life in committee, but haven't emerged yet for Congress to vote them into law. However, the House Subcommittee on Health & the Environment is readying a new bill that is expected to be introduced "in the next week or two," according to staff member Burke Zimmerman. The new recombinant DNA bill represents an effort to "get out of the bog" that previous bills had settled in, Zimmerman said in a seminar at the AAAS meeting. It is a "two-year interim control measure" that will extend many provisions of the National Institutes of Health guidelines for recombinant DNA research to all such public and privately supported activities. Besides extending the coverage of the major safety provisions of the NIH guidelines, the bill grants the Secretary of Health, Education & Welfare certain regulatory and enforcement powers that many critics say are sorely missing in the NIH guidelines. For example, civil penalties (of $5000), inspections, and injunction power through the courts are part of the bill. The bill also contains a provision for pre-empting local statutes, saying that they must be "not only more stringent than the comparable federal provision, but necessary to protect health or the environment." Exemptions to the provisions of the bill could be granted by the HEW Secretary for experiments that, for example, assess risks. Major changes, however, would involve public comment. A study commission also is mandated to evaluate federal policy on genetic "manipulation." That
commission would expire along with the bill after a two-year trial. Meanwhile, the comparable committee in the Senate seems to be taking a wait-and-see stance. Dr. Lawrence Horowitz of the Senate committee notes that concerns in the Senate "have lessened with the new data available." Other questions, such as the role of the public in policy making and the necessity of introducing further federal regulations, need to be weighed, he says. That notion—that regulation of recombinant DNA research might best be handled locally—was echoed in another session at the AAAS meeting. One of several speakers, Clare D. Sullivan of Harvard University noted that the issue is really part of a larger lab safety question that directly affects lab workers. Thus, she asserts, workers ought to be represented on safety committees— by law. Moreover, the workers' evaluation of safety features plus their vigilance in making sure that safety provisions are followed are critical to the regulation of recombinant DNA (and other) research, she says. G
Pesticide residues from crop spraying may not be monitored properly
for which tolerances, or residue limits in food, have been set by EPA are seldom monitored by FDA. Moreover, he says, traces of 21 pesticides suspected of causing cancer or tumors cannot be monitored by FDA's most frequently used multiresidue test. GAO assails pesticide Eschwege notes, "Our followup reresidues in food view of actions taken by EPA and FDA to implement our [1975] recSome members of Congress don't ommendations shows that little believe that the Environmental Pro- progress has been made." EPA's astection Agency and the Food & Drug sistant administrator for toxic subAdministration are doing an ade- stances, Steven D. Jellinek, concedes quate job policing pesticide residues that the GAO assessment oV the in food. Recent Congressional testi- agency's pesticide data problems is mony may have reinforced those "generally correct." doubts. Jellinek, however, points up the Last week, as part of a continuing problems of sheer volume in adminseries of hearings into environmental istering the agency's pesticide procauses of cancer, the House Interstate grams. For example, even with gen& Foreign Commerce Committee's eric registration of active ingredients Subcommittee on Oversight once common to different pesticide foragain received a downbeat assessment mulations, Jellinek estimates that of federal pesticide safety efforts. reregistration of products mandated Henry Eschwege, directer of the by the 1972 amendments to the FedGeneral Accounting Office's com- eral Insecticide, Fungicide & Rodenmunity and economic development ticide Act could take from 10 to 15 division, told the subcommittee's years. And since many pesticide tolchairman, Rèp. John E. Moss (D.- erances were set years ago, long before Calif.), that since GAO first reported analytical technology could detect on pesticides in December 1975, parts per billion of residues in food, he major shortcomings have continued insists that "to revoke them would be to exist in EPA and FDA registration a major administrative effort." Jelliand monitoring programs. Observes nek told the subcommittee that EPA chairman Moss, "The evidence is now making "an aggressive effort" suggests that these programs are with its so-called rebuttable preanything but strong and effective." sumption against registration GAO found, for example, that (RPAR) program to establish the many data gaps that it recommended safety of the largest-volume pestibe closed still exist and EPA has not cides. When EPA puts a pesticide asked pesticide makers to supply the ingredient on its RPAR list, manumissing information by specified facturers must supply additional dates. At the same time, Eschwege safety data, based on current techpointed out to the subcommittee that nology, or risk losing the pesticide D residues of 195 of the 268 pesticides registration. Feb. 20, 1978C&EN
7
