Letter from Linus Pauling to Richard Lippman September 9, 1957. Page 1  Larger Images / More Information. 3 pp.  View Transcript

<   September  1957   > S M T W T F S 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

Activity Listings

• Check from AHP to Marie Antoinette Co. For $99.94. [Filed under LP Biographical: (Business and Financial: Bank Statements and Canceled Checks, February 1956-December 1957), Box #4.024, Folder #24.2]
• Check from AHP to Mrs. Elizabeth Gillette for $10.00. [Filed under LP Biographical: (Business and Financial: Bank Statements and Canceled Checks, February 1956-December 1957), Box #4.024, Folder #24.2]
• Check from LP to Astounding Science Fiction for $6.00. [Filed under LP Biographical: (Business and Financial: Bank Statements and Canceled Checks, February 1956-December 1957), Box #4.024, Folder #24.2] [Also filed under LP Biographical: (Business and Financial: Check Registers, 1957-1962), Box #4.076, Folder #76.1]
• Check from LP to California Institute of Technology for $33.53. [Filed under LP Biographical: (Business and Financial: Bank Statements and Canceled Checks, February 1956-December 1957), Box #4.024, Folder #24.2] [Also filed under LP Biographical: (Business and Financial: Check Registers, 1957-1962), Box #4.076, Folder #76.1]
• Letter from Arthur B. Simon, W.H. Freeman and Company Publishers to LP RE: Notifies him that the company is going to reprint General Chemistry. Asks if the manuscript should be changed to include the new changes in the periodic table and notifies him of changes that will have to be made to accommodate the revised periodic table. Asks if these and other changes meet his approval. Handwritten notes in margins include replies in the affirmative to his questions as well as calculations from LP and some other changes that should be made. [Filed under LP Books: 1953b.1]
• Letter from L. Kelley Mayhew, Temporary Chairman to Friend RE: Notifies them that a committee is being organized to protect public health against improper applications of nuclear energy. Outlines the goals of the committee. Includes background information on nuclear bomb tests and how those tests have affected the population. [Filed under LP Correspondence: (M: Correspondence, 1957), #257.2]
• Letter from LP to Dr. William V. Consolazio, National Science Foundation RE: LP is pleased to continue reviewing Molecular Biology proposals. [Letter from Consolazio to LP July 29, 1957] [Filed under LP Science: (National Science Foundation: Correspondence, 1947, 1951-1989), Box #14.029, Folder #29.4]
• Letter from LP to Georg Jensen & Wendel RE: Clarifies that he wanted the dinner knives to have short blades and long handles and that parcel post is fine for shipping it. [Letter from Georg Jensen & Wendel to LP September 3, 1957] [Filed under LP Correspondence: (G: Correspondence, 1957), #141.1]
• Letter from LP to Gerald R. Ansul, Seminar Committee, Marshall Laboratory RE: Thanks him for the invitation to speak at a seminar but states he will not be able to due to prior engagements. [Letter from Mr. Ansul to LP July 11, 1957] [Filed under LP Correspondence: (A: Correspondence), #12.23]
• Letter from LP to Jack A. Kent, Minister, The Unitarian Church RE: Thanks him for the invitation to speak to the Long Beach Liberal Forum but declines due to an already full schedule. Expresses a desire to speak at some later time. [Letter from Reverend Kent to LP July 10, 1957, Letter from Ms. Wulf to Reverend Kent July 12, 1957] [Filed under LP Correspondence: (K: Correspondence, 1957), #201.1]
• Letter from LP to Marion Syrek, Jr RE: Declines his invitation because of an already full schedule. [Letter from Mr. Syrek to LP August 14, 1957] [Filed under LP Correspondence: (S: Correspondence, 1957), #380.1]
• Letter from LP to Mary Sonnenberg, Tracy Woman's Club RE: Declines her invitation because of an already full lecture schedule for the coming year. [Letter from Mrs. Sonnenberg to LP August 7, 1957] [Filed under LP Correspondence: (S: Correspondence, 1957), #380.1]
• Letter from LP to Professor Frank Sullivan, Department of English, Loyola University of Los Angeles RE: Thanks him for the invitation but states that he has decided to not accept any more speaking invitations for the next several months. [Letter from Professor Sullivan to LP August 21, 1957] [Filed under LP Correspondence: (S: Correspondence, 1957), #380.1]
• Letter from LP to William Gordon, Program Director, Jewish Community Center RE: Declines the invitation to speak at the Community Center. [Letter from Mr. Gordon to LP August 30, 1957] [Filed under LP Correspondence: (G: Correspondence, 1957), #141.1]
• Letter from Robert W. McEwan, Hamilton College, to LP RE: Invites LP to visit Hamilton College in late October to speak to a general college audience. Also mentions that maybe LP could visit with some of the faculty colleagues and advanced students. [Letter from LP to McEwen September 16, 1957] [Filed under LP Speeches: 1957s2.7]
• Letter from Warren D. Donahue, Yakima Valley Junior College, to LP RE: Thanks LP for his work on informing the public about nuclear fallout and requests ideas on where to find more materials about fallout for a class he is teaching. [Letter from LP to Professor Donahue September 12, 1957] [Filed under LP Correspondence: (D: Correspondence, 1957), #98.22]
• Memorandum from LP to Dr. Richard W. Lippman RE: Proposes a method for handling phenylketonuria by injection of nucleic acid. [Filed under LP Science: Orthomolecular Medicine and Mental Health: Materials re: Ford Foundation grants for the study of mental disorders, 1955-1956: Box #11.089, Folder #89.14]
• Memorandum from LP to Dr. Richard W. Lippman. [Filed under LP Correspondence: (Lippman, Richard W., 1951-1961, 1980, 1982), #217.5]

  9 September 1957

  MEMORANDUM

  To: Richard Lippman

  From: Linus Pauling

  Subject: Proposed Investigation

  During my trip this summer I had one idea that seems to be a good one. It is about a proposed method for handling phenylketonuria by injection of nucleic acid.

  You will remember that I talked with you last spring about the experiment of Benoit. It had been reported in the newspapers that Benoit, working in the Sorbonne, had injected nucleic acid prepared from one strain of ducks into the abdominal cavity of ducks of another strain; and that, apparently as a consequence of this treatment, the ducks had changed in character, so that they had some of the characters of the strain corresponding to the nucleic acid, although they did not resemble hybrids of the two strains. This phenomenon is somewhat similar to transduction in microorganisms, which has been thoroughly investigated.

  While I was in Paris I talked with a number of people about Benoit and his work, although I did not meet Benoit himself. Everyone said that Benoit is a thoroughly reliable man, that he himself was not sure that something might not have gone wrong in his work, that he regretted not having carried out any controls, but that his reported results should be accepted at their face value. I visited the Macromolecule Laboratory of Sadron in Strasbourg, and talked with the young woman who had prepared the nucleic acid. Then, when I returned to Paris, I found that the newspapers were carrying an account of a later report by Benoit, made to the Academy of Sciences in Paris. Benoit reported that ducklings from the changed ducks and drake had inherited the changed characters.

  The idea that occurred to me at about this time is that it might be possible to introduce into the cells of a phenylketonuria child some nucleic acid that would be able to carry out the synthesis of the enzyme that is lacking in the patient, and that in this way the disease might be brought under control.

  I think that the proposed treatment probably should be carried out with use of nucleic acid made from sperm of the father of the child; at any rate if this is possible. One reason for this is that this nucleic acid would introduce fewer characters that are foreign to the child itself than nucleic acid from another source. If all genes were heterozygous in the father, the child would have inherited just half of the father's genes, and the other half would be foreign. Only one of the two phenylalanine oxidase genes would be useful, however, so that the ratio of useful phenylalanine oxidase gene to foreign gene would be just the same as for nucleic acid from an unrelated source. However, probably many, perhaps most, of the genes in the father are homozygous, so that neither one of a pair would be foreign to the child. If, for example, 90 percent of the genes were homozygous, the number of foreign characters introduced per effective gene with use of nucleic acid from the father would be only 20 percent as great as with use of DNA from another source. There is, also, probably an emotional or psychological value to using DNA from the father.

  If the decision is made that it would not be improper to carry out this proposed therapy before animal experiments have been tried, I suggest that we plan to go ahead at once. Presumably the greatest probability of success would come in the treatment of very young patients, but it might not be necessary to restrict the trials to these patients.

  I suggest also that we plan to begin some animal work immediately. I do not know what inborn error of heredity in animals would be best suited to these studies, but there are without doubt some such errors known that would be so suited, and I request that you make a literature search, in order that the work could be started at once. If an experimental error with a recessive inborn heredity could be found, there would be the possibility of carrying out extensive studies of this therapeutic method.

  The proposed therapy of injection of DNA could, of course, be tried also for other diseases involving abnormal genes. If a galactosemic child is available, it might be worth while to apply the proposed treatment in this case too.

  Linus Pauling:W

  cc: Dr. Tarjan