ATTACHMENT 2 A Summary Chronology, Prepared by W. A. Selle, Secretary to the NEPA Research Guidance Committee, of the Debate on the Proposal for Human Experimentation MEMO ROUTING SLIP NEVER USE FOR APPROVALS, DISAPPROVALS, CONCURRENCIES OR SIMILAR ACTIONS 1 ILLEGIBLE ACTUALS CIRCULATE ORGANIZATION AND LOCATION DATE 2 FILE INFORMATION 3 NECESSARY ACTION NOTE AND RETURN 4 SEE ME SIGNATURE REMARKS These data have not been referred elsewhere in this office. I have saved them for you as I believe you ahve not heard the last of it yet. D.O. ILLEGIBLE DATE ORGANIZATION AND LOCATION TELEPHONE DD FORM 1 FEB 50 95 COPIED: 3/3/75 RECORD GROUP: #341 ENTRY: ILLEGIBLE BOX: #258 RESTRICTED CHRONOLOGICAL REVIEW OF IMPORTANT EVENTS IN THE HISTORY OF NEPA'S EFFORT TO SECURE SUPPORT FOR ITS RECOMMENDATION OF HUMAN EXPERIMENTATION June 23, 1948, Chicago: Creation of NEPA Medical Advisory Committee. December 10, 1948, San Francisco: Formulation of plans by the NEPA Medical Advisory Committee to Survey Literature on Biological Efforts of Ionizing Radiation. April 3, 1949, Washington: The NEPA Medical Advisory Commtitee approved data compiled and tabulated by its Subcommittee on Literature dealing with effects of radiations and estimates of radiation damage to humans, and approved a report of its Subcommittee on Human Experimentation that the Armed Services arrange for and conduct unclassified experiments making possible accurate prediction of biological dmage in man from known levels of radiation exposure. May 14, 1949, Chicago: The Executive Panel of the NEPA Medical Advisory Committee recommended for approval by the full Committee Ten Fields of Research, including Human Experimentation, which are significant to NEPA and the Military Establishment and which more clearly define the effects of various exposures and conditions. June 3, 1949, Washington: At its first meeting on June 3, 1949, the Joint Panel on Medical Aspects of Atomic Warfare (RDB) endorsed in principle the conduct of human experimentation for the purpose of determining levels of human tolerance to ionizing radiation in the establishment of militarily acceptable dosages. June 1949: NEPA published and widely distributed its handbook on radiation biology, "Tabulation of Available Data Relative to Radiation Biology", in which is included rough estimates of radiation damage reseulting to man from known levels of radiation exposrue. 1 July 1949: Representatives of the NEPA Project contacted key personnel of the Air Force, AEC, Research and Development Board, and Office of Medical Services of the Office of Secretary of Defnse, and approsed them of NEPA's recommendations. October 4, 1949, Chicago: The NEPA Medical Advisory Committee approved detailed plans for the conduct of its recommended research, and, in assigning priorities, established Human Experimentation as the Number I recommendation. At this meeting the committee also reaffirmed its position that the Armed Services should arrange for and conduct unclassified experiments on human tolerance to varying levels of radiation exposure. October 7, 1949, Washington: The working group of the Panel on Medical Aspects of Atomic Warfare concurred in the recommendations of the NEPA Committee, endorsed the recommendations (BAW 9/1) and a protocol for reserach (BAW 10/1), and resolved that the matter of human experimentation, in order to find precisely the effects of dosage up to 150 r, is so important that it should be given high priority. November 8, 1949, Washington: The Committee on Medical Sciences (RDB) endorsed the action of its Panel approving the recommendations of the NEPA Medical Advisory Committee with regard to human experimentation, both in principle and according to the suggested protocol for human studies (BAW 10/1). 2 February 1, 1950, Washington: Following its action of November 8th, the Committee on Medical Sciences learned that the AEC Medical Group did not favor human experimentation. In view of this development ILLEGIBLE Committee members requested re-study of the problemin the light of the implications of the policy of the AEC Medical Group. At its following meeting, February 1, 1950, the Committee on Medical Sciences revoked its previous endorsement of the action of its Panel approving the NEPA's recommendation and voted to refer the matter back to thePanel for further consideration. February 16, 1950, Washington: The Panel on Atomic Warfare reconsidered its former action of endorsement of the NEPA recommendation in the light of specific reservations and objections held by the Committee on Medical Sciences and AEC. After analysis of the objections cited against human experimentation and discussion of the urgency of military requirements for information obtainable only by observations upon human volunteers, the Panel reaffirmed its position concerning the endorsement of the recommendation of the NEPA Committee (BAW 9/1, 10/1) and formulated a statement of Panel opinion on the subject later transmitted to the Committee (BAW 10/2). May 23, 1950, Washington: The Committee on Medical Sciencesof RDB, upon review of the Panel's reaffirmation of its original action and statement of opinion (BAW 10/2), passed a motion endorsing the view that "it is essential to obtain all necessary scientific information concerning radiation doses and the effecton may by all means of biological experimentation, as promptly as possible, including if necessary human experiments under established principles of such experiments." 3 July 1950, Washington: The Secretary of the NEPA Research Guidance committee received a letter dated July 12, 1950, from Dr. Meiling, Director, Office of Medical Services, Office of Secretary of Defense, to the effect that the NEPA proposal is a problem of the Biological Division of AEC, and that upon approval by the latter the military services will cooperate in the "development of the military aspects of this important problem." August 1950, Washington: According to Dr. Joseph Pisani, Executive Director, Committee on Medical Sciences, Dr.Meiling, acting on advice of the Surgeons General, directed an inquiry to AEC soliciting their opinion on this matter. (The complete summary of the action of the Committee on Medical Sciences of RDB is enclosed in the body of this report.) A reply to this communication received by Dr. Meiling stated that it was the opinion of the Advisory Committee of Biology and Medicine, AEC, that human experimentation at that time was not indicated. September 12, 1950, San Francisco: The NEPA Research Guidance Committee, successor to the NEPA Medical Advisory Committee, proposed that various prominent individuals be solicited to assist in persuading influential agencies to work for approval of human experimentation, the results of which are needed not only by NEPA but by the Armed Services as a whole and Civilian Defense. 4 October 31, November 1, 1950, Washington: The Joint Panel on Medical Aspects of Atomic Warfare approved a motion expressing its desire to continue efforts to secure approval for human experimentation and appointed a working group to devise ways and means of presenting the view of the Panel to proper authorities in order to secure approval for initiation of the program. November 28-29, 1950, Washington: The Committee on Medical Sciences, noting the appointment of a working group of the Joint Panel on Medical Aspects of Atomic Warfare to investigate the question of human experimentation, brought out the fact that this subject is being satisfactorily prosecuted. December 12, 1950, Chicago: At the meeting of the NEPA Research Guidance Committee on this date, it was recognized that unless AEC or some other highly influential agency recommends human experimentation, the NEPA proposal would never be carried out by the Armed Servcies. Finding it difficult to understand the failure of the Surgeons General and Dr. Meiling to accept the recommendations of the Committee on Medical Sciencs, which had previously approved the NEPA proposal, the NEPA Research Guidance Committee concluded that it had proceeded as far as possible in obtaining support for its recommendation. The Committee further agreed that continued effort ont he part of NEPA to obtain approval for initiation of the proposed program would be harmful to the total effort and to NEPA itself, since the latter is being identified with what appears 5 to be a lost cause. The Committee thereupon approved a report by Drs. Stone and Cantril expressing NEPA's position, indicating that NEPA's earnest effort to obtain needed information for the Air Force had failed and that NEPA can offer the Air Force no better data for estimating radiation hazards associated with nuclear powered aircraft than those submitted almost two years ago, at which time the estimates were unsatisfactory. Is a terminal effort of the Committee on this matter, it requested its secretary to prepare and appropriately file a complete record of NEPA's attempt to secure action on the recommendation. W. A. Selle, Secretary NEPA Research Guidance Committee 6