EXHIBIT 42 COMMENT ON THE NEELY-PEPPER BILL BY DR. ARTHUR B. PARDEE, CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, PASADENA, CALIF. The cancer problem differs from the atomic bomb problem in that fundamental discoveries which will lead to its solution have not yet been made. These discoveries may appear in some seemingly unrelated research, perhaps electron microscopy, or perhaps nutrition. The appropriation should be entrusted to a nonpolitical body of cancer experts, capable of planning a research program in many fields; $100,000,000 could be expended over a period of several years on such a plan., I do not believe that this sum could be profitably spent on a short-term program devoted to clinical work on cancer victims exclusively, and a bill which specifies more exactly the method of attack would be far inferior to the present form. It is my hope that the bill wil lbe reported out quickly, favorably, and unanimously. Every day we waste, we kill half a thousand of our citizens. EXHIBIT 43 JUNE 28, 1946. JULIUS JAY PERLMUTTER, Chairman, Sponsors of Government Action Against Cancer, Pressure of professional matters makes it impossible for me to attend the Senate Foreign Affairs Committee hearings on the Pepper-Neely cancer research bill. Offer my regrets to Senator Pepper and members of the committee. Would appreciate your expressing my views for the record as follows: As a member of Sponsors of Government Action Against Cancer I urge passage of bill S. 1875 in its present simple form. I feel that the $100,000,000 appropriation is a minimum fund for this purpose. I am in accord with the authorization proposing that the President of the United States appoint a new and independent commission to carry out the purposes and intent of the bill. SYLVAN GOTSHAL, Attorney. EXHIBIT 44 STATEMENT BY COL. STAFFORD L. WARREN, UNIVERSITY OF ROCHESTER, SCHOOL OF MEDICINE AND DENTISTRY, ROCHESTER, N. Y. A PLEA FOR ADEQUATE SUPPORT AND CONTINUITY IN CANCER RESEARCH (By Stafford L. Warren, colonel, Medical Corps, AUS) PRINCIPLE As a basic principle it is possible to make an all-out attack on the cancer problem if you have four things. That was essentially the principle used in the atomic-bomb project. However, cancer may be a tougher problem and may take a long time to solve. If you want a solution in the shortest possible time this is a good way to get it. If you have (1) a goal, (2) resources, and (3) continuity, you can then get (4) men who will in turn have the ideas and get the job done. We have the goal, i. e., the solution of the cancer problem. We lack the resources and the continuity. WHAT IS WRONG NOW? Cancer research in the United States has been neglected. The reasons are mainly economic. There has been practically no support of cancer research on a Nation-wide scale with continuity. Actually little of the money available has been spent primarily on cancer research. Most of the effort has been in education using the fellowship system, which is primarily designed to teach the young professional men. It is set up on a yearly basis, with no continuity. The yield has been correspondingly small. A man cannot look forward to a career in cancer research in his own institution. There is relatively little support of cancer research by the foundations because they are organized in general for other pur poses. Since we lack large resources and continuity, we have few men devoting their time to cancer research. There are a great many excellent men, however, who could and would work in this field if resources and continuity were provided. It is for this reason that the following program is proposed. GENERAL PLAN At least $100,000,000 should be disbursed over a 10-year period for cancer research exclusive of routine diagnosis and treatment. For immediate attack some proportion of the amount should be set aside for grants-in-aid to be given out as soon as possible, say $5,000,000, and spent over a period of the next 5 years on a 3- to 5-year basis. This policy would bring new interest into the field, start the training of young men and achieve a certain amount of results within that time. It would feel out the present very hopeful leads and find the way to initiate a bigger and yet a sound program later. It would give some continuity from the start. Longer continuity would be achieved by asking universities with medical schools to submit general plans for a unified attack on a university-wide basis, involving all science departments: Biology, chemistry, physics, and the medical school departments, in an integrated program, all working together. No barriers should exist. Thus the minds and energies of the whole staff could be utilized as well as those directly employed. This would entail buildings for additional laboratories, preferably physically built into the medical school structure; these might cost about $1,000,000, depending on the plan of the institution. About half a million could be used to supply the special equipment needed and about a million-dollar annual budget for 10 years should be available. Such a unit would have a total cost of about $11,500,000 over a 10-year period. There could be eight such institutions spread throughout the country and built into university medical schools. That would leave $2,000,000 for grants-in-aid for the second 5 years and $1,000,000 for administration, meetings, publications, etc. A fundamental principle would be to hold the university responsible for its own program. SUGGESTED TYPES OF ADMINISTRATION 1. One method would be to set up a Federal Cancer Commission of nine men with power to formulate the policies, administer the money, build buildings, etc. It must have allocated to it the whole sum the first year to be used until expended, otherwise continuity could not be guaranteed. The make-up of the Commission is the crux of the whole business. It has to have considerable daring and aggressiveness. It should be a part-time Commission, should deal in general policies only and not be concerned with the details of experiments. It should pick out the medical schools and universities in which the effort is to be made; assure itself that the university is serious, will accept the responsibility for its own program, will properly administer the money and see that the program is active and effective. The university cannot assure success, but if it will put good men into the program and make available consultation and other facilities, the results will be very satisfactory. The Commission should be made up of youngish aggressive men, not necessarily known as cancer specialists, but having a broad over-all experience in science and the medical and biological sciences. The terms should be staggered around 3 years and reappointment should be possible at the discretion of the President. There should be a full-time lay administrator who will be a disburser, a contractual agent (unless you could find a man like the late Archie Woods). From the outset he should not have much to do with policy and relatively little with inspection other than financial. Subsidiary boards of part-time men would be appointed by the Commission for special considerations such as to deal with the grants-in-aid and other problems. The President might ask for nominations for Commissioners from a committee composed of representatives from the Association for Cancer Research, the American Cancer Society, the United States Public Health Service, the Surgeon General's Office of the Army and Navy, the National Academy of Sciences, and several members chosen at large, or others as he saw fit. 2. A second method.-The Public Health Service Act deals with cancer research but has certain defects. It might be feasible to change this act by statute so that funds could be made available to the Public Health Service to build buildings in public and private institutions, equip them and set up an annual budget. The annual budget is the "sticker" because no governmental agency has a guaranteed annual budget. An outright grant at the beginning of the whole sum for the "unit" might be the solution. With these two major changes and the money the United States Public Health Service could function in pace of a commission. 3. A third method. The proposed (and not yet passed') National Science Foundation bill could be modified so as to include an additional specific budget of this magnitude ($100,000,000) to be "used until expended" for cancer research. This would assure the proper resources and continuity. It would, however, require the formation of a special board to handle the special policies which would be necessary, yet the program would be integrated with the whole science program. It should not be done in such a manner as to detract from the main purposes of the National Science Foundation bill but should supplement it. HOW GUARANTEE GOOD WORK The quality of research varies with the institution, the men and the way they use their facilities and time. Any new program has much of fumbling and false starts at the beginning. It will take 3 to 5 years to get such a program into full effort. Procurement and training of men, designing of equipment, etc., all take time. There will be some waste. A guaranty to find a cure is not possible within any given period of time. Only good work can be certified. Since the university is asked to accept the responsibility for its own program some universities may not wish to participate. Once they have embarked upon a program they will do their own policing. Competition among the institutions will be severe and prevent injudicious overlap of detailed programs. Correlations can be achieved by conference. Failure of a program will be evident to the personnel and they will leave the institution to go where a progressive effective program is under way. Annual reports before professional national societies will be evaluated automatically by the membership as is customary at present. Clinical trials of possible therapeutic leads (although these may come late in the program) will give the final answer. Such tests of good work will be slow but definite. Negative findings in well-planned programs must not be considered as failure for these are valuable in outlining the field. A fruitful change in ideas often comes out of such blind alleys. POLICY OF THE COMMISSION The policies should be broad, leaving the greatest possible scope for individual initiative, yet avoiding too great diffusion of effort. They should neither overdirect nor underdirect the program. Each university program should be well rounded even though it may be restricted to one field. Several fields may be attacked at once. The main effort should be built around the strongest men in their own staffs who have proposals. Some percentage (20 percent) of the budget should be used for exploration in new endeavors. The Commission should delegate a certain proportion of unpromising leads to each institution for complete exploration in order to sweep the field clean. If the cure for cancer is found during the 10-year period and further major support of the research in this project deemed unnecessary, the project should be wound up, leaving the facilities with the institutions possessing them provided they can be used for further medical or other research. Unused money might be used for treatment facilities or returned to the Government Treasury at the discretion of the President on the recommendation of the Commission. If the cure for cancer is not found within the 10-year period, suitable recomnendations should be made by the then existing Commission to the President concerning appropriate action to be taken. The Commission should have the power to withdraw support from an ineffective organization if in its opinion the work is not being properly done or is dishonestly done. Care must be taken that this is not done because of a clash of ideology or methodology for this would tend to wreck the flow of ideas and the whole project would suffer. RESEARCH WITH RESOURCES AND CONTINUITY IS A CHAIN REACTION Not every person who desires to explore the unknown in science is necessarily endowed with the ability to do so. However, even in the average scientist, given a good training and with the proper associations, ideas begin to flow. If facilities are available and the experiment can be carried out promptly and decisively the train of thought begins to probe and expand. Ideas and results beget more ideas and results. It is like a chain reaction. Amass enough centers of such chain reactions and a whole frontier is breached. During the last war this was illustrated in no uncertain manner. In addition to the atomic bomb, there was radar and thousands of other lesser but important items vital to our success in war. Why not use a similar technique in the war on cancer? EXHIBIT 45 MR. JULIUS JAY PERLMUTTER, New York, N. Y. WASH NOTON FEDERATION OF CHURCHES, DEAR MR. PERLMUTTER: The board of directors of the Washington Federation of Churches, which met this noon, unanimously passed a resolution approving the Pepper-Neely bill. We will pass on this information to Mr. Pepper and Mr. Neely. Is there anything else that you would like to have us do? Thank you for sending me the telegram concerning the hearing. The Council for Community Action with over 12,000 participants throughout the country endorses the Pepper-Neely bill and feels that the action implicit in this bill is required to save people from the threat of cancer. We hope for favorable congressional action on this bill. ARTHUR M. LOEB, Chairman, EXHIBIT 47 SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR, Washington, July 9, 1946. Hon. CLAUDE PEPPER, Chairman, Subcommittee on S. 1875, Senate Foreign Relations Committee, United States Senate. DEAR SENATOR PEPPER: I am writing you with reference to S. 1875, a bill in which I am personally very interested. I know of no problem facing the American people today as important to our national health and welfare as that of cancer. Cancer, which stood seventh in the list of the causes of death 30 years ago, now ranks second. During the three war years of World War II, 1942-44, inclusive, cancer killed a half million American citizens as compared with 273,000 who died in battle. The Congress of the United States recognized the importance of this problem in 1937 with the passage of the National Cancer Institute Act, but that act in itself was only a beginning. S. 1875, which would authorize the President to undertake on a large scale the mobilization of our scientific and medical knowledge to discover the means of preventing and curing cancer and the financing of this authorization with a hundred million dollar fund which would continue to be available until expended, is, I think, the second necessary step which must be made. The enactment of this legislation would enable us to centralize our knowledge concerning cancer and to support necessary research wherever it might be possible to obtain results. I regard this bill as providing the tools which we need for an all-out fight against this scourge. The enactment of this legislation will enable the Government to sponsor and finance fundamental scientific research which cannot be done without adequate Government support. A program as large and extensive as the cancer research contemplated by this bill is far beyond the financial resources available to even our largest pharmaceutical and chemical concerns. For private industry to move forward in this field would call for a group of beneficent stockholders and investors, which I do not believe now exists. Even if a private concern did expend fifty or one hundred million dollars on research and was able to find the cause and cure of cancer, the cost of such a cure to the individual patient would, of necessity, be so high that the average citizen would be unable to afford the private service if available. I see no conflict between this legislation and the Kilgore-Magnuson bill to establish a National Science Foundation. This legislation authorizes the President to act as he sees fit in the field of cancer research. If the National Science Foundation legislation is passed by the Congress, the President could at that time, if he so desires, combine the operations of cancer research with the National Science Foundation. I cannot urge too strongly immediate action by the Congress on this important piece of legislation. Chairman, Subcommittee, Foreign Relations Committee, United States Senate, Washington, D. C. MY DEAR SENATOR: Enclosed is a letter from Mrs. Grant Hess, State commander of the American Cancer Society for the State of Idaho, recommending certain amendments for S. 1875. As your committee studies this legislation, it will be appreciated if you will give consideration to the amendments proposed by the Idaho Division of the American Cancer Society. With kindest regards, I am Sincerely yours, GLEN H. TAYLOR. AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY, The Honorable GLEN TAYLOR, Senate Office Building, Washington, D. C. DEAR SENATOR TAYLOR: Residents of Idaho are deeply interested in cancer control as evidenced by their support during our recent campaign. Idaho gave 180 percent of its assigned goal, or $62,000, to our society this year for its work in education, research, and service to cancer patients. 89471-46-15 |