lowup and I have been thwarted in an attempt to find out anything about the followup. So I am glad that you are holding this hearing and I hope that we will keep it going until we really get some information as to how we can protect our people now from the consequences of this experimentation in the past.

Thank you very much.

Chairman GLENN. Thank you.

Senator Lieberman.

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR LIEBERMAN

Senator LIEBERMAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I associate myself with the remarks that you made and I think it is important for us to thank and note your early and aggressive interest in this general subject of the effect of the nuclear age on people, and particularly with regard to testing. You have been way out front on this and I am glad that we finally have somebody on the other side of Pennsylvania Avenue who is equally concerned about this.

I join with everybody in complimenting Secretary O'Leary on her leadership here. I think if they gave a Nobel Prize for guts in Government, I would nominate you. I hope you would win it. You have given splendid and very moral public service here.

Clearly, the concerns that are being expressed here are not new. They recur periodically in the modern age. They recurred most intensely and powerfully, I think, after the Second World War when some of the first stories were emerging from the concentration camps of the so-called medical experiments that were done by people there. In fact, as you know, the Nuremberg war tribunals issued guidelines in the late 1940's which, while not having the force of law here in the United States, nonetheless set a moral standard for what governments should do in carrying out medical experimentation on their people.

The concerns have risen and fallen at various times. Unfortunately, they fell until you came on the scene and brought us back to what is our responsibility, which is to look back and to try to right the wrongs that were done by the Government against our own people and, second, to look both to today and tomorrow to make sure that the heightened attention on this problem will have the effect of making sure that, to the best of our ability, we act to guarantee that it does not occur again. I look forward to being part of the process of assuring that through this Committee.

I want to mention just two specific cases that have come to mind that I look forward to questioning both Secretary O'Leary, Secretary Brown, and representatives of the Defense Department about, both different but within the orbit. One concerns the use of radiation treatment, but not on experimental subjects, the use of radiation in treating Governmental employees as part of their normal work and the provision of medical care to them.

I am speaking specifically about a radiation treatment that was apparently used on a very large number of Navy submariners-of course, it is of concern in Connecticut because of the base in New London-to treat swelling in the inner ear by, as I understand it, placing radium 226 basically into the nostril. The treatment wasI don't know that I would say it was common in the 1940's, 1950's and 1960's when it was used, but it was used a fair amount.

Later, there were studies done that suggested a heightened connection between that particular treatment and brain and neck cancer. Studies first noted it in a public service bulletin by two doctors at Johns Hopkins in 1977, and then later in a 1982 paper in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute by a Dr. Sandler.

In the aftermath of your raising these questions, Madam Secretary, there are two people who had been treated, and both happened to be public health specialists, who have raised this concern again. I have sent letters to Secretary Brown particularly, with copies to you and the Defense Department, and I look forward to questioning you about what we can do to fulfill our responsibility to these people who were treated with this radiation while in Government employ and now may be subject to a heightened incidence of brain and neck cancer.

The second is quite different, but within the orbit of this hearing, or agenda of this hearing, as described by the Chairman, and that is a story that was printed in the Hartford Currant last fall taking off from the experience of a man who lives in East Hartford, Joseph Sepalowski, who was apparently one of thousands who during the Second World War were, it appears, unknowingly used as guinea pigs in experiments with mustard gas because of the fear thatwell, the fear that mustard gas would be used by our enemies in World War II and how to deal with that. I look forward to asking Secretary Brown about that because I know a number of those veterans have filed petitions for compensation with the VA and I am anxious to hear how we are handling those cases.

Clearly, you have opened a Pandora's box here which has wide. ramifications for us. It is going to be unpleasant. It may be costly, but it was clearly the right thing to do and we now have an obligation to work alongside you to make sure that our actions are responsive and fair and far-looking forward in dealing with future problems of this kind.

I thank you and I thank the Chair.

Chairman GLENN. Senator Cohen, any remarks?

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR COHEN

Senator COHEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have a prepared statement I would like to submit for the record and just offer perhaps a couple of comments.

Chairman GLENN. Without objection, it will be included in its entirety.

PREPARED STATEMENT OF SENATOR COHEN

Mr. Chairman, I want to commend you first, for holding this hearing, and second for the way in which you laid out the agenda for the hearing, namely focusing upon the past, present, and also the future. As we focus on the future of scientific research we must also consider the past and, I think if history has taught us anything, it's that scientific truths cannot be examined through the lens of human degradation.

The experiments that were conducted by our government agencies no doubt were carried on-if I may borrow a phrase from network television-with an eye on America. But the protection of future generations cannot come at the expense of the most vulnerable members of the present-particularly when the purpose and potential consequences of those experiments remain undisclosed, misleading, or stamped "top secret."

I think Secretary O'Leary's decision to open our sealed history books has prompted criticism that this openness will release an avalanche of complaints of victimiza

tion. Many complaints may prove to be without merit. But we must remember that the search for buried truths will be tedious, time consuming and essential.

I know that at least one distinguished witness will testify today that the reaction to the disclosure of these experiments verges on the hysterical rather than the historical and that we are imposing an ex post facto ethical standard upon an era that was waging a cold war against an imperceivable enemy. And there is some merit to this position. However, the issue here is not whether the levels of exposure were in excess of a government standard or acceptability, it is whether the human subjects were informed of the nature of such experiments, and if they gave, or were capable of giving, informed consent.

We recently celebrated Martin Luther King, Jr.'s birthday and I think few of us could look back upon our history with any sense of pride when we consider the manner in which we set upon those who demand a full measure of citizenship. Our moral sensitivities have evolved over the past several decades, but I must say that slipping radium substances, in however small doses, to unsuspecting, uninformed, and unconsenting citizens-some handicapped, some mentally deficient, smacks of an evil that cannot be dismissed as he suggests, that there they go again, a bunch of politicians on a posturing binge.

There is a simple answer, as far as I am concerned. If I'm going to be asked to assume a risk, however small, for my benefit or that of my fellow man, even one that may prove beneficial, then ask me. Don't slip me a radioactive mickey. That's a matter of old decency, not one of ethical evolution.

I look forward to Secretary O'Leary's testimony and to the other witnesses'.

Senator COHEN. I want to commend you for, No. 1, holding the hearing, but also the way in which you laid out the agenda for the hearing, namely focusing upon the past, the present, and also the future.

Picking up on what Senator Lieberman has just said, I think if history has taught us anything, it is that scientific truths cannot be examined through the lens of human degradation. The experiments that were conducted by our Government agencies no doubt were carried on, if I can borrow a phrase from one of our networks, with an eye on America, but the protection of future generations cannot come at the expense of the most vulnerable members of the present, particularly when the purpose and the potential consequences of those experiments remain undisclosed, misleading, or stamped top secret.

I think Secretary O'Leary's decision to open up our sealed history books has prompted some criticism that it is going to release an avalanche of complaints of victimization, and it is quite possible that many of these complaints will prove to be without merit. The search for buried truths is going to be tedious, it is going to be time consuming, it is going to be costly, but it is absolutely essential.

I know that at least one distinguished witness today is going to testify that perhaps the reaction to the disclosure of these experiments verges on the hysterical rather than the historical, and that we are imposing an ex post facto ethical standard upon an era that was waging a cold war with an implacable enemy, and I think there is some merit to that particular position.

We recently celebrated Martin Luther King, Jr. Day, and I think few of us could look back upon our history with any sense of pride when we consider the manner in which we set upon those who demanded a full measure of citizenship. So our moral sensitivities have evolved over the past several decades, but I must say that slipping radium substances, in however small doses, to unsuspecting, uninformed and unconsenting citizens, some handicapped, some mentally deficient, smacks of an evil that cannot be

dismissed with a suggestion, there they go again, a bunch of politicians on a posturing binge.

There is a simple answer as far as I am concerned. If I or anyone else is going to be asked to assume a risk, however small, for my benefit or that of my fellow man, and one that may prove quite beneficial to me, then ask me; don't slip me a radioactive mickey. That is a matter of an age-old decency and not an ethical evolution

one.

ary look forward to Secretary O'Leary's testimony and the other

witnesses.

Chairman GLENN. Thank you.

Senator Sasser, any comments?

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR SASSER

Senator SASSER. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman. First, I want to commend you, Mr. Chairman, for calling these hearings this morning, and I very much appreciate your efforts to discover the true nature and consequences of the experiments performed by the Federal Government during the late 1940's and 1950's.

As I have discussed with you, Mr. Chairman, several facilities in my native State of Tennessee were reportedly involved in some of the human radiation experiments conducted during the cold war. There have been accounts of radioactive substances used as tracers in medical experiments at Vanderbilt University Hospital Clinic in Nashville, Tennessee, and also of radioactive substances used at what was then John Gaston Hospital in Memphis, Tennessee, and on school children in Nashville, Tennessee. In addition, documentation has been discovered by the General Accounting Office that indicates there were deliberate radiation releases at Oak Ridge, Tennessee, in 1948.

Now, I might say that since these reports began to surface in December, my office here in Washington and our field offices across the State of Tennessee have been flooded with calls and letters from people who believe they may have been involved in some sort of radiation experimentation, and I believe that citizens who find themselves in this situation of great anxiety deserve to know the full story about what went on.

Now, I am deeply concerned that we do not know the full extent of early radiation experimentation both by Government-sponsored programs and in private programs. The Committee has, I think, Mr. Chairman, the difficult chore of evaluating the experimental and sometimes medical use of radiation based on the prevailing scientific and medical standards of the time that the experiments were conducted. The Committee must then compare those standards of yesterday with today's standards and determine what duty the Government or its contractors have to track down radiation participants and inform them of their potential risk.

Now, there are a number of very complex issues that we must address. We must be mindful of the Privacy Act in our search for experiments and those who participated in them. We have a serious obligation to address the concerns raised by those who believe they have been involved, like Ms. Emma Craft, whom we will hear from later today, from Nashville, Tennessee. I might say, Mr. Chairman, Ms. Craft braved the first airplane ride of her life to

come to Washington to tell us her very difficult story, and I think you will find it very interesting.

Now, all of these are extremely difficult issues, but I have every confidence that we can successfully resolve them under the very capable leadership of Secretary Hazel O'Leary. I have the highest praise for the way the Secretary has handled this matter. I think that she has shown remarkable courage and compassion in immediately coming forward and calling for the declassification of documents and full disclosure, and I think, Madam Secretary, your actions are in direct contrast to some of your predecessors who apparently turned a blind eye when presented with evidence that human beings had been involved in radiation experiments. So I want to commend Secretary O'Leary and her colleagues at the Department of Energy for an expeditious action in establishing an interagency working group and setting up hotlines at the Department of En

ergy just will conclude by saying this, Mr. Chairman. We have a

very broad jurisdiction in this Committee and we are going to examine a broader range of experimentation than just the focus of the working group that the Secretary of Energy has set up. Nevertheless, all the issues targeted this morning, I think, are matters of concern and we look forward to hearing the Secretary's comments on them, and I and my staff look forward to working with her and the working group that she has formulated.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Chairman GLENN. Thank you, Senator Sasser.
Senator Cochran.

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR COCHRAN

Senator COCHRAN. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much. We are all happy that these hearings are being held because we all share the feeling that we need to get the facts out. We need to find out what has happened in the past. We need to examine the adequacy of current research protocols, guidelines and standards to assure that whatever mistakes may have occurred in the past will not be repeated. In my view, that should be the emphasis of our undertaking, although the other issues that are the subject of the hearing are important as well.

We welcome the Secretary of Energy to the hearing and the other witnesses who will be appearing before us today and thank them for their cooperation with us in this effort.

Chairman GLENN. Senator Bennett, do you have any comments?

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR BENNETT

Senator BENNETT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Simply noting, coming from Utah, where we have had problems with nerve gas, where we have had the down-winder effect from the atomic explosions in the air in Nevada, I represent a constituency that is very concerned about this hearing and I welcome Secretary O'Leary.

Chairman GLENN. Thank you very much. We have a statement from Senator Dorgan which we will insert into the record at this point.