[Email Exchange between Bruce Weniger and David Baltimore]

Weniger, Bruce

From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:

Weniger, Bruce [CORP/NIP1/bgw2]
14-Jan-97 14:31
Baltimore, David (MIT)
Essex, Max (Harvard SPH)
Re: PACHA Research Committee Conference Call

Dear Dr. Baltimore,
I was out of town yesterday and unable to respond
to your e-mail message sooner.
I can appreciate your upset with how we
opened up the debate about AIDS vaccines into a forum
that reaches non-scientist public policymakers. The issue of
who should be responsible for coordinating their development,
and how and by whom fundamental "go/no go" decisions for
their field testing should be made, etc., are subjects upon which
people may honestly disagree. A historical perspective from
the polio experience on such public policy issues is in Richard
Carter's "Breakthrough..." book, pp. 100-339, and Saul Benison's
oral history of Tom Rivers, pp. 488-578.
The Times did not guarantee us whether nor when they
would use the opinion piece. To have let it be known prematurely
that one was in the works on a subject of such tremendous
political attention might have jeopardized it. I am sorry you could
not have the courtesy of advance notice. Earlier drafts -- before
the announcement of your responsibility to chair a committee of
outside advisors to recommend NIH AIDS vaccine policy -- did
not mention you, but used other "pegs" for the topical timeliness
required for an Op-Ed page piece.
I regret that you found the opinion piece to be
"strident." It is certainly candid, but meant to be constructive.
The comment about your experience in vaccine research was
intended to make a point, based on a search of your MEDLINE
bibliography revealing no publications reporting the R&D of any
vaccine for human or veterinary use. It was not intended to be
an attack on your personal integrity and scientific achievements,
which I greatly respect. It was to raise what I believe to be a
reasonable criticism of the dominant leadership and
decisionmaking to date on AIDS vaccine R&D.
Clearly, there is a certain amount of cynicism in the
community of persons involved or interested in AIDS vaccine
R&D about the paucity of funding, delays, strategic gaps, and
absence of accountable leadership to date. But I feel it was
expressed far more respectfully in our piece than in some of
the accusations in the past by AIDS activists frustrated by
lack of focus and progress in their areas of interest.
About the conference call, given the unique role
you have been given, there is no expectation of your
making any kind of formal statement or talking the entire
time. It is entirely up to you among potential options. It could
all be questions to and answers from you. Or, you could ask
us the questions; you have the materials I sent summarizing
the database on which we are forming our own opinions and
recommendations. You could just listen to our opinions and
let us join in what must be a deluge of communications you
are receiving telling you what you ought to do. If you wish, you
could discuss and disagree with the content or implications of the
committee's December 15, 1996 memo, or with my NYT opinion

5571095.0495.064