There are two things about the biological agent field I
would like to mention. One is the possibility of technological surprise.
Molecular biology is a field that is advancing very rapidly and eminent
biologists believe that within a period of 5 to 10 years it would be possible
to produce a synthetic biological agent, an agent that does not naturally exist
and for which no natural immunity could have been acquired.
MR. SIKES. Are we
doing any work in that field?
DR. MACARTHUR. We are
not.
MR. SIKES. Why not?
Lack of money or lack of interest?
DR. MACARTHUR.
Certainly not lack of interest.
MR. SIKES. Would
you provide for our records information on what would be required, what the
advantages of such a program would be. The time and the cost involved?
DR. MACARTHUR. We will
be very happy to. The information follows:
The dramatic progress being made in the field of molecular
biology led us to investigate the relevance of this field of science to
biological warfare. A small group of experts considered this matter and
provided the following observations:
1. All biological agents up to the present time are representatives
of naturally occurring disease, and are thus known by scientists throughout the
world. They are easily available to qualified scientists for research, either
for offensive or defensive purposes.
2. (Within the next 5 to 10 years, it would probably be
possible to make a new infective microorganism which could differ in certain
important aspects from any known disease-causing organism). Most important of
these is that it might be refractory to the immunological and therapeutic
processes upon when we depend to maintain our relative freedom from infectious
disease.
3. A research program to explore the feasibility of this
could be completed in approximately 5 years at a total cost of $10 million.
4. It would be very difficult to establish such a program.
Molecular biology is a relatively new science. There are not many highly
competent scientists in the field. almost all are in university laboratories,
and they are generally adequately supported from sources other than DOD.
However, it was considered possible to initiate an adequate program through the
National Academy of sciences - National Research Council (NAS-NRC, and
tentative plans were made to initiate the program.
However decreasing funds in
CB, growing criticism of the CB program. And our reluctance to involve the NAS
NRC in such a controversial endeavor has led us to postpone it for the past 2
years.
It is a highly controversial issue and there are many who
believe such research should not be undertaken lest it lead to yet another
method of massive killing of large populations. On the other hand, without the
sure scientific knowledge that such a weapon is possible, and an understanding
of the ways it could be done. There is little that can be done to devise defensive
measures. Should an enemy develop it there is little doubt that this is an
important area of potential military technological inferiority in which there
is no adequate research program.
0 comments:
Post a Comment
Please insert your comments here