Document text
Machine-read from the scan, so expect some errors. Lines that couldn’t be read are left out.
Page 1
3re Glass: Seem unfortunate to the public the very divergent views by peo?le on these bodies, such as the scientists not agreeing among themselves. Dr. Failla: I consider I have not given up the right to express my own ideas abut anything by joining organization or cormnittee. certain responsibilities therefore have to use discretion about Tdhat I saj. and analyze. malrd statements, if such statzments would be detrimental to organization to which I belmg. By joining, I assme Lf it comes to a showdown would resign first and then Dr. Warren: There is quit2 a difference between what one expresses as a member of .a committee on the basis of the deliberations of that committee and what you say on the basis of your own work and your own judgment in t h e field, for example, I am proposing to write my senator about this Newburger Bill and express a strong opinion, which is apart from anything discussed here. I would not s a y it without formal vote,from -9CE?L It's not quite that--?:AS Cte., for example, made certain statements for meAmbers of the press who questioned them. If I were saying this as a member of ACEPI Dr. Ougher: I have some strong feeling about the Newburger Bill but I would not write about it, because xorking for a tax-free organization I would not do this. I nould express my view to t h e Commission, not as a co.nplaint to the tine rigllt of the individual. It might injure the organization f o r xhich I work. There are some of the pwblems of obligation that go beyond Failla (to Glass) : Sone time you CUI avoid -------------- by stating in report that your opinion has nothing to do with the committee of which you are a Dr. Glass: I would agree with you but not as to the general success of the is that after the -4AA.S symposium on Sr-90 Swder gave his talk and gave exact opposite point of view. Ordered me to explain the apparent contradiction. Comittez, had been asked to explain the contradiction and did something which nade it sound 4ike more than ever like a contradiction. The particular thing that rankles sorest in ny mind There were comments in the papers. Campbell, of the T)r. hnham: Dr. Failla asked that I explore with the Chairman the possibility of re-esgtablishing somewhat on basis as always in the past a group of experts concerned with safety of the test operations. We discussed this rather fully. to have some nev group take a look at Plumbbob. a look at it. He is not adverse to this but would be willing ?+hat sort of body iJas reluctant to have an executive committee take
Page 2
Dr. Bugher: Would it be an advisory cornittee such as i n the last series? a.Warren: This brings up a some-dhat fundamental question t o the tests. In almost every test series once a series has gotten under way there is something added toit.that had not been adequately weighed in the natwe of the work. I doubt they get the degree of scrutiny they had earlier.I also wnder if as mcK-ingenuity is put into trying t o get a l l the answers from any one t e s t as there is t o getting various aspects of things from a series of tests. One of the things that makes us extrenely vulnerable on world opinion our series. Does not make sense to scientists in other nations that .there really have t o be as many as there are. .:been pointed out t o me by neihtrals that the total aggregste of Russian tests is less than any one of our series and have made creditable pmgress in their program. Knowing the eagerness of the military t o get everything done that can be, and kn3wing the considerable ' .number of t e s t s have been in the past------- not much i n the training of a very small nunber of troops (?) ---I have wmdered if there were some way that we aould appropriately get word t o the Commission that we are losing heavily i n world opinion by giving a blanlt check t o m i li tary requests. When one has these things coming up hurriedly is the large number of explosions i n It has repeatedly Alnham: The military requirements are very moderate. year ago were willing to let it ride. Both AEC and military a Dr. Failla: Would like to go back t o suggestion I made last time. The public and foreign countries feel that milit az cj. and AEC are running the show and does not consider the population of US or other countries by going ahead and exploding these bombs with the excuse that it is necessary. Will have a problem i n that the Secy. of Defense is directly responsible tothe press, the AECis directly responsible t o the press, and can't get anybody any higher than that. order t o do that and the AEC has grief enough rttiul-witll JElAE without still another watchdog group. Would have very rough time i n evaluating Would have t o know as much as the members of the AEC i n Dr. Bugher: I would like t o see apoll expressing public opinion as t o how peop;le Dr. Cant ril(to SY): Do you find in the UN Cte that neutral countries tell you our shots are being advertised in their papers as we get notices that Ws sia has put offa blast? Dr. Barren: All the shots--English, Russian, and our own are headline items. One of the very important things it is difficult for us t o keep i n mind is the very small area that England, France, Belgium and Norway have-- they haventt,4any place t o go.
Page 3
re Cs 137--27 yrs. instead of 33 Mention w a s made that minutes of special meeting at AEC in Nov. 1956 had never Move acceptance of minutes as amended--second ik. Cantril 1 . Dr. Warren k e d that these minutes be approvedd-second Dr. Cantril. Dr. Glass-A consideration of continuing the genetics program which the Japanese D r . Bugher: I am in favor of having another look at the ABCC program. Dr. Marren: From perhaps a parliamentary standpoint I wonder if it is getting the ACEI4 in an operative position? It should be left to M'I staff to 4 suggest sending someone to look over program. Dr. Dunham: I suggest that Dr. Glass mite ik. Stern or Ilr. Neal a note, since this is the group that should be thinking about this. a f o r m 1 proposal might upset the equilibrium of the re-constituted CAC. For ACED1 to make I . in case Inst. of Industrial Medicine into a broad thing (????)--- to wait to see how negotiations come out. I SchDol of Public Health to encourage broad problems. Will probably haw Dr. Dunham: The WOO is negotiating with the University. The operational cost will be several hundred thousand dollars. how much t o perate somethere else. Going to get information as to Will have to talk with US. The Dental School wants to move into the same building. The thought of the Foundation (Rockefeller) strengthening is a fine idea. Suggested working out some sort ofoutline for the presentations at these meetings (with a view to shortening the presentations) to do this. CL3 agreed