Harvard professors yesterday gave various views on the debate regarding guidelines the National Institute of Health (NIH) will use to govern potentially dangerous genetics research.

Charles A. Thomas, professor of Biological Chemistry at the Medical School, yesterday called the guidelines "excessively cautious."

Thomas, a member of the Recombinant DNA Molecule Program Advisory Committee, which proposed the guidelines to NIH, said that "none of the experiments have been shown to have high risks and the dangers are purely hypothetical."

Margo G. Haygood '76, a member of a special advisory committee which met last week to assist Donald Fredrickson, the director of NIH, in his final decision on research guidelines, said yesterday that she approves "the basics of the guideline," adding that she was called on "to provide public input."

Daniel Branton, professor of Biology and chairman of the Committee of the Faculty to Regulate DNA Research at Harvard, said yesterday he expects the Harvard group will follow the Institute's research guidelines.

Richard N. Goldstein, Houghton Assistant Professor of Microbiology and Molecular Genetics, who represented the Boston-area recombinant DNA group before the special advisory committee at NIH, said yesterday the dangers and risks in DNA research are "very real."

Standards

"I'm not doing recombinant DNA research, partly because it's dangerous," Goldstein said.

Recombinant DNA molecule research involves transplanting bits of the genetic material, DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid), from one form of life to another. Genes of plants, animals, and even tumors may be grown in bacteria in this kind of research.

The research may lead to revolutionary advances in medical science, but man-made germs immune to current antibiotics could conceivably be produced, according to a newsletter published by the Forum for the Advancement of Students in Science and Technology.