Skip to main contentU.S. National Library of MedicineU.S. National Library of Medicine


Profiles in Science
   
Pinterest badge Follow Profiles in Science on Pinterest!

The Paul Berg Papers

Title:
Letter from Paul Berg to Daniel M. Singer pdf (56,518 Bytes) transcript of pdf
Letter from Paul Berg to Daniel M. Singer
Number of Image Pages:
1 (56,518 Bytes)
Date:
1970-01-19 (January 19, 1970)
Creator:
Berg, Paul
Recipient:
Singer, Daniel M.
Strasser, Spiegelberg, Fried, Frank & Kampelman
Source:
Original Repository: Stanford University Libraries. Department of Special Collections and University Archives. Paul Berg Papers
Rights:
Reproduced with permission of Paul Berg.
Exhibit Category:
Protein Synthesis, Tumor Viruses, and Recombinant DNA, 1959-1975
Relation:
Metadata Record Letter from Daniel M. Singer to NIH Study Section members (January 9, 1970) pdf (123,286 Bytes) transcript of pdf
/ps/access/CDBBCR.pdf
Metadata Record Letter from Daniel M. Singer to Paul Berg (January 12, 1970) pdf (36,642 Bytes) transcript of pdf
/ps/access/CDBBCQ.pdf
Metadata Record Letter from Daniel M. Singer to Paul Berg (January 21, 1970) pdf (119,178 Bytes) transcript of pdf
/ps/access/CDBBCN.pdf
Box Number:
2
Unique Identifier:
CDBBCP
Document Type:
Letters (correspondence)
Language:
English
Format:
application/pdf
image/tif
Physical Condition:
Good
Transcript:
January 19, 1970
Dear Dan:
I have your letter describing your efforts and request for my help in getting NIH Study Sections to propose the names of formerly blacklisted people for Study Section assignments. Frankly, I am not very keen on that approach. Having gotten Finch to announce that there will be no blacklist is a significant advance. I don't believe that the best way to proceed now is to confront him with a number of contrived test cases. Most likely, the Executive Secretaries of Study Sections who have in the past been thwarted in their nominations will reintroduce these in the hope of freeing up some of these individuals. Therefore, in a quite natural way, I think the new regulations will be tested. And, if in fact the same kind of secret veto of certain people for political reasons still exists, the word will get around and he can legitimately be confronted with non-compliance with his own policy. In essence, I suppose what I am suggesting is to allow the test to arise naturally via the normal mechanism for proposing Study Section candidates and that we should keep our ears open for any evidence of violation of the announced policy. Calling his bluff in the way you suggest seems needlessly provocative.
With best regards,
Sincerely,
Paul Berg
Metadata Last Modified Date:
2008-05-01
Linked Data:
RDF/XML     JSON     JSON-LD     N3/Turtle     N-Triples