A Harvard Medical School professor has defended research in genetics, arguing that abuses of genetic knowledge "cannot be prevented by curtailing genetic research."

In a recent article Dr. Bernard D. Davis, Lehman Professor of Bacterial Physiology, tried to allay public fear that advances in genetics might allow large-scale genetic control of humans and curtailment of personal freedom. His article "Prospects for Genetic Intervention in Man" appeared in the Dec. 18, 1970 issue of Science.

Davis argued that by the time it is possible to change human personality by changing genes, society will have developed methods of preventing abuse of science. These methods should be applicable to genetics and must arise because other fields have already provided the techniques for mass manipulation of humans.

Davis asserted that psychology, nutritional study, pharmacology, surgery and the genetics of selective breeding are currently capable of providing techniques for manipulation of human characteristics.

The public fear of genetics is due to a misunderstanding of the differences between monogenic and polygenic traits resulting in an exaggeration of the current powers of genetics, Davis says. Monogenic traits are determined by only one gene, while polygenic traits may be determined by several hundred thousand genes. The recent isolation and synthesis of single bacterial genes does not indicate that isolation or synthesis of a specific group of human genes determining a polygenic trait is within the experimenter's easy grasp.

Davis said, "It is especially pertinent that the most interesting human traits-related to intelligence, temperament and physical structure-are highly polygenic."

There are other genetic techniques which, compared to specific polygenic changes, may prove easier to perform. Davis said that monogenic changes in man may be possible and that the determination of the sex of human children by separating sperm cells should be a soluble problem.

If monogenic changes in humansprove feasible, certain hereditary diseases may be cured if they result from a single defective gene. Such a defect may mean the cell falls to produce a certain essential protein such as insulin.

Since medical use of genetics seems to be more feasible than the potentially abusable techniques of polygenic changes, Davis said he believes genetic research should continue.

Davis said yesterday that the National Cystic Fibrosis Research Foundation and the National Foundation for Genetics and Neuro-muscular Diseases have recently launched a campaign to educate people and get support for continued work in the medical uses of genetics.