Discussion of Acbm Exec Session, BNL, 5/9/64

Page 1

c . PRESENT: Hodge-, Sterner, Bale, Cohen, Green, Moore, Russell,Patt, Elmo; ACBM EXEC SESSION, BNL, 5 / 9 / 6 4 MOORE: R e work of Cronkite - I consider this "A" work. Is penta fair amount of time with these people. Visiting Committee about the fact that some of the things he i s doing on iron and B - 12represent studies of long term nutritional interest rather than items of relevance to the program of AEC. see incorporated in our report a statement to the effect that we consider these studies on long-term turnover rates of vitamin B-12 and work on Iron-24 continued and point out fact that although primarily nutritional problems, they are problems of great significance to all of medicine and provide whatever interest necessary to continue this Gene (Cronkite) feels pressure from the I would like to BOND: Gene's program has not been singled out by the Visiting Comit tee but have had criticism from the VC on aspects of the medical problem. The criticism has been directed more towards Dr. Dah1:s program rather I agree completely with what he said that these studies are of importance and they are criticisms not sufficiently fundamental i n I had the idea that balance( ? ) of iron had been worked on a long time Appreciate Dr. Moore's comment on that but in my opinion, These studies are getting more basic. GREEN: (re Dahl) I cannot evaluate his work. I thought itwas very good work and right in the very best tradition. His experimentation is fine but he needs to get theoretical structure He just didn ' t use genetic I think he needs some collaboration with a geneticist. BALE: I very much appreciated the presentation of Bond and his associates. Iwas impressed with Dahl ' s and Cronkite ' s work and turning to Biology Department, I think a great amount of work i s going into the program; work on aging very important and hope t o see that pushed ahead i n time and hope he gets encouragement t o go ahead. Plant science work most interesting. Seems t o me Dahl's work is very good. Only question COKEN: Scheffer claims work of this kind has been done. RUSSELL: I was very much interested to see the radiation field in the forest and was much impressed with rather detailed information on it. il extent is the soil biology being looked,at ? CURTIS: Only very slightly. Not too much interest there. Have tried to ellto make contact with universities and have them

Page 2

COHEN: I was little bit disappointed with the Stoner presentation. also disappointed in Howard Curtis ’ presentation. tighter situation and that the emphasis on chromosome ------------. I was disturbed that you (to Curtis) found it too easy to throw the Not impressed much but think he has great potential. GREEN: The Koshland papers I think were the high point. Their work i n microbial genetics that they are working with is also good. BOND: I .look to pulling together the program with bringing in Cotzianas