therefore have little impact on the program. I think a statutory council is important

Senator EAGLETON. Are intramural, nonstatutory committees about as effective as interagency coordinating councils?

Dr. SINEX. Just about. You have the picture. They are advisory to the intramural directors. They are chaired by the intramural directors. They do not report independently to the statutory council.

Senator EAGLETON. Usually they pick the most expendable guy to represent the Department, and he shows up once a month, does he not, and they all stare at each other, and they say, "We are coordinating and intramuraling," and drink coffee and adjourn?

Dr. SINEX. No; I would say that would be unfair with Child Health. The advisory committee actually does meet with the intramural director for 6 days a year. However, he chairs the meeting; he makes the presentation. We respond to him.

Senator EAGLETON. You all salute?

Dr. SINEX. We salute; right.

I do believe there are some unique roles an institute can take in regard to the health of the elderly. Now "service" is sometimes a bad word at the NIH. That is, they are not eager to have the NIH research effort diluted with the more direct helping of the people, but I think Mental Health and the Heart Institute and the Cancer Institute have done some good work in the public sector.

I do not think this can be done by a program or center. I think it can be done by an institute with an appropriate advisory council.

Now it is very important in aging to have a good statutory council because I think that we are sitting on a biological bomb. There is a need for lay monitoring of research on aging. I do not think the average laymen appreciate what could be the impact of such research. The scientists should be reporting to a lay group which participates in the setting of research priorities. Because, if they do not, I think I can see a day coming in a few decades when people will say, "Well, again, you let those stupid people create a new kind of bomb," or something like that. I believe a statutory advisory council is an important thing.

What I would like to do before I talk about the commission is just very briefly introduce a person in the audience, Dr. Hettinger. He was a vice president of one of the divisions of Grace & Co. He left there to accept an advanced training fellowship in aging research at the Gerontology Research Center in Baltimore and now would like to do research on aging. He has found that he is unable to do so because of some of these funding problems.

Would you care to hear a very brief word from Dr. Hettinger? Senator EAGLETON. Fine. Would you give us all the pertinent statistics as to who you are?

STATEMENT OF DR. WILLIAM P. HETTINGER, JR., PRIVATE CITIZEN, FORMERLY ADVANCED TRAINING GRANTEE, NIH, NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF CHILD HEALTH AND HUMAN DEVELOPMENT

Dr. HETTINGER. Senator Eagleton, I am Dr. William P. Hettinger, Jr. I did not expect to testify this morning. I came here as a citizen interested in the entire subject of aging research.

I have previously been general manager of research for a large chemical company, and in my last position before attempting to enter into aging research, I was vice president for the Davison Division of W. R. Grace & Co. In these positions I have directed the efforts of 100 to 150 researchers for some 10 years.

Senator EAGLETON. Are you an M.D. or Ph. D. type of doctor? Dr. HETTINGER. I am a Ph. D. I am a physical chemist by training, Northwestern University, 1951, and have been practicing physical and inorganic chemistry in various fields for some 18 years.

About 10 years ago, as a result of some research I was involved in, I became acquainted with, and interested in the aging problem from a number of standpoints. It intrigued me as an intellectually challenging scientific problem. Also I had become aware of the importance of preventive medicine through an executive health program at the company I was with, and I saw the great advantage of this health

program.

Also being involved in catalytic chemistry, I saw the problem of aging as one very similar to the problems one encounters in catalytic chemistry where I have been quite active. Six years ago, I applied for an advanced training grant which I had to decline after receiving notice of approval.

Four years ago, through a series of events, I decided to reapply for an advanced training fellowship in aging research, which I did, and which was again approved. For some period of time I did not accept it because just at that time I was promoted by the company to a vice presidency and felt obligated to remain. Finally, though, in 1968, due to several circumstances-one, my continuing interest, and also the death of a daughter at 12 years of age from cancer, during which sad and trying time I had long hours to reflect on the present limitations of medicine, and to speculate on the possible contributions other disciplines might maye to these problems-I began to see more and more that I might actually be able to contribute to the work concerned with the aging individual.

I did so also, because as a director of research, accustomed to attempting to visualize the future, I had reached the conclusion that developments in biology, medicine, pharmacology, and instrumentation were progressing at such a pace that we might now be able to make a breakthrough in aging, and I frankly wanted to be in on the ground floor, so to speak, of what I consider to be both the most challenging and exciting research of this century, as well as one for which there is great social and human need. Therefore I also looked upon it as a way to serve.

So I resigned from my position at W. R. Grace and accepted this 3-year training fellowship.

In preparing myself for aging research, I decided to get as much fundamental training as I could. I was under the sponsorship of Dr. Nathan Shock, who is chief of the Gerontology Research Center in Baltimore. To get this training I spent several years of intensive study. I had to go back to the university and become a student. I became a student in cell biology at the University of Miami-September 1968 to June 1969 and I applied for and received permission to obtain 2 years of medical school training at Johns Hopkins. So I put in 2 years of medical training as well.

During this time I have also carried out research on two problems at the Gerontology Research Center in Baltimore. That is, I carried them out simultaneously with my educational program.

Now, I have completed 3 very intensive years in gerontological research. I am a very dedicated person. I am very much concerned about both the fundamental problems of aging as well as the appliedthat is, helping the aged-and the disease aspects of it.

My fellowship ended in April of this year. And I must say the Government spent a lot of money in training me. Over $60,000 was expended in giving me this training.

In anticipating completing this program, I did a lot of corresponding to see if I could find a way of putting this training to work. I have written letters to the Director of the Institute of Child Health; and many to the pharmaceutical industry. I have done my best to contact both universities and hospitals, all without success. I finally have had to accept the fact that there just is no place or way to put this training to work at the present.

In other words, after 3 years of being trained in gerontology, there just is no place that I know of where I can find employment. And so, therefore, I have had to drop the whole program and I have returned to industry as an industrial chemist.

I would like to add, however, Senator, that I am grateful for the support I have received over the past 3 years, and I recognize that my situation is not unique. This is a difficult time for medical research, and I just happened to become available at a low point in terms of financial support for medical research.

I had not intended to testify, but I though that due to Dr. Sinex's suggestion, and in view of my interest in the subject and my dedication to it, that it might be of interest to you, and generally helpful.

When I accepted this fellowship 3 years ago, the Gerontology Research Center was just being dedicated. That was in June of 1968. The plan, as I understood it, was that that institute or that center would expand and that many new individuals would be employed, and that there would be an increase in dedicated, concerted effort. I fully anticipated that at the end of my training program I might be able to find employment at that center.

This has not been the case. The staff and funds have not increased. If anything, my observation has been that they have decreased. The mission orientation, I feel, has lessened. The building at the present time is only half occupied. And this is part of the disillusionment I have had to face as an individual in going through this effort.

Three or 4 years ago, the training effort appeared to be directed to encouraging professionals from other disciplines and young uncommitted students to consider aging research as a career. Those responsible for this effort, appear to have done a good job. Now, because of the shortage of funds, however, the criterion for the few that are employed appears to be based, out of necessity, on previous performance in biology and medicine. Obviously, for one changing fields, several years may be required before one is able to reach the frontiers and be in a position to contribute new information. In industrial research it has been estimated that it takes 6 to 7 years for a researcher entering a new field to become truly productive. I believe this is particularly so in aging research where time itself is a prime variable.

Therefore the lack of additional funds to sustain the efforts of those being trained has made the situation particularly difficult.

That completes my comment.

Senator EAGLETON. Doctor, you left Grace and you took this fellowship when? What month and what year?

Dr. HETTINGER. In April of 1968.

Senator EAGLETON. About 3 years ago, right?

Dr. HETTINGER. Right.

Senator EAGLETON. And then you spent a year at the University of Miami?

Dr. HETTINGER. Right. For 9 months I was a student there. I also started a research program while there.

Senator EAGLETON. You were in training; and were you paid some kind of a stipend to maintain yourself while you were there?

Dr. HETTINGER. Yes, sir.

Senator EAGLETON. In addition, they paid tuition and fees, et cetera? Dr. HETTINGER. Yes sir.

Senator EAGLETON. And then after finishing that, you spent 2 years at Hopkins?

Dr. HETTINGER. Right.

Senator EAGLETON. Again they paid you some kind of a stipend as well as tuition and things like that?

Dr. HETTINGER. Right.

Senator EAGLETON. While you were at Hopkins affiliated with the medical school, did you do some kind of research or work at the Institute of Child Health?

Dr. HETTINGER. Yes. I continued my research at the Gerontology Research Center, while at the same time attending classes. I spent full time on research every summer, and kept a program going during the school year. I was attempting to develop a model system of aging with a small microaquatic animal, the rotifer; so therefore, I would carry out my laboratory work in the morning early and then go to classes, and then come back late in the afternoon and evening and finish the experiments. And also this work required working Saturdays and Sundays, so I would go into the laboratory those days.

Senator EAGLETON. Insofar as weekdays are concerned, Mondays through Fridays, typical work days, what percentage of your time Monday through Friday was spent being educated, at it were, at Hopkins, as contrasted with what percentage of your time was devoted to research? Just a ball park estimate.

Dr. HETTINGER. It varied somewhat.

Senator EAGLETON. Your best guess.

Dr. HETTINGER. I would say during the school year at Hopkins, probably about two-thirds of my time, on the average, was devoted to taking medical school courses. I took all the laboratories for gross anatomy, pathology, and so forth; and about one-third to research; and during the summers, then, full time on research.

So I really have been associated with the Gerontology Research Center for 3 years, almost continuously.

Senator EAGLETON. What I am getting at is this. Really what the summary is, in essence, of your testimony is that here you have been with them 3 years; they have invested, as you said, $60,000 in you.

You have devoted on occasion as much as two-thirds of your time being better educated in this area, and now the romance is over.

Dr. HETTINGER. That is exactly right.

Senator EAGLETON. You are better educated but the Government is not utilizing your talents.

Dr. HETTINGER. I must also say that there was a financial loss to me because I had quite a higher income along with many fringe benefits in my previous position.

Senator EAGLETON. Sure.

Dr. HETTINGER. Not that I expected to get that kind of income when I completed my training but I did expect to be able to continue in aging research and to make a reasonable income. But I have now had to go back to industry, and believe me, I was lucky to get safely back. But in a sense I have lost time and I have gone into a field now which will reimburse me, but not as much as previously.

Senator EAGLETON. Is what you are now doing in industry in any way related to gerontology?

Dr HETTINGER. No; there is no connection at all. It is so far removed you would not believe it, although it may be symbolic. I will be involved in clay technology and application.

Senator EAGLETON. When you were coming toward the end of this fellowship which expired in April of this year, not too long ago, what contacts did you have with anyone in NICHD or elsewhere as to what future utilization of your newly acquired expertise might be made by the Government?

Dr. HETTINGER. I had been in touch with Dr. Leroy Duncan, who was director of the extramural program on training for the past 2 or 3 years. We have discussed this problem quite frequently. He has tried to be most helpful and suggested a number of outside leads, which I have followed up, and which have not proven fruitful.

I have, of course, discussed this problem with Dr. Shock, who is chief of the Gerontology Research Center, over some period of time, and he has evidenced an interest in employing me; but it would appear that and incidentally, I have GS ratings of 15 in health science administration, in physical science administration, in biology and chemistry, so I have completed all that redtape a year ago alreadyfor some reason or other there just is a shortage of positions, and a shortage of funds. I have also explored cancer research, and to date have not been successful there either.

I wrote to Dr. La Veck, who is Director of the Child Health Institute and Human Development. He informed me that there were no openings in the extramural program and directed me to Dr. Lowe, who is director of the intramural research program, and Dr. Lowe has in turn directed me to the branch chiefs at Baltimore. However, I have been in touch with them for a long time and know that there really are no positions there.

So as I mentioned previously, I have pursued that situation and many others about as far as I could.

The company I am working for now is going to allow me to carry out some research perhaps 1 to 2 weeks a month, just as a philanthropic contribution, and I have hopes of working at Levindale Home for the Aged, associated with Sinai Hospital in Baltimore.