23 Clairemont Rd.,
Belmont MA 02178
( 6 17 ) 484-046O.

Mar. i0, 1992.

Dr . Max i ne Singer
Carnegie 1nstitut.ion

Washington UC 20005.

153:) P St. NW,

Dear Ma:.: i ne ?1

This is primarily a fan letter to conqratulate you on your
statement in yoi.w- instit.ution's recent year book. T particularly
1 iked your attent.iun to the fact. that the pursuit of a
problematic case deprived 11s of the opportunit.y t.o test the
rt;spunses that t.he scientiCic: community had been developing as a
snlution to the need for tightening up.

I wish our Nat. kad. Sci. took such a vigorous and for-t.hright
position or1 the misconduct issue; 5: dan't think its management
has adequately represented the interests of the scientific
cnmmunity. Yot~ may know that the forthcoming NAS report on this
issue has been held up fur months by efforts tu discourage Howard
Schachman from presenting a minority report. As a referee on a
draft nf the report I could not endorse it., far- I aqreed with
Howard on the basic problems: acceptance of far more guilt than
the Cacts warrant , and willingness to t.oler<ate an excessively
broad def i ni ti an of mi scoriduct which waul d get the government
into areas better handled within oiir research institutions.

I 've wondered whether the issue o+ misconduct has not cooled down
enough so that the scientific cummunit.y might try to get the
UST replaced by some other administrative mechanism, which would
be less oriented toward pleasing Dingell. Unfortunately, as I
see it, while Bernadine Healy has been very coctrageous in
standing up to Healy and in rejecting Hadley's approach, and has
agreed with me that Dingell is a much greater menace than monk
sc:ient.ists realize, she seems satisfied with Hallum. 1: forind him
incredibly inadequate in a public exchange that we had at the A5M
annual meeting a year ago. But neither the NAS nor the NIH seems
likely to provide the necessary leadership for an effort to
replace the USI. Do you see any possibilities'?

Un another matter, the most recent issue of Human Gene Therapy
contains a statement by Bernadine at a Congressional hearing
concerned with gene therapy, and I was disappointed to find that
in discussing the aims of the NIW she emphasized exclusively the
need to dn research that would pay back the taxpayers in the form
oC practical results. There was no mention of the need also to
continue the kinds of basic research that have always been the
main source of major breakt.hroughs leading to unpredictable
practical results.  I hope her statement was simply fitted to the
political context and does not signal. a possible shift in policy.

You may have heard that I have had a health problem during the
past half-year -- metastasis 0.f prostate cancer to the spine,
producing weakness of the leus as a result of spinal cord
compression. But fortunately my medication did not interfere
seriously with mental function, and I was able to remain cheerful
and to complete an autobiographical essay far Ann. Rev.
Microbiol. I am happy to be able to report further that T have
had phenomenal progress. In the fall 1 was pretty much confined
at home, and cuuld walk only by leaning on a walker aCter every
step. Now, adter conscientious exercise, I can go up a flight OC
stairs and am beginning to wall:: with canes. So I expect to
remain functional for some time, and I regard this phase in my
life a5 a dividend.

bjith warm regards to you and Dan,

Cordi a1 1 y ,

Bernard E). Davis