Page ii
NATIONAL ACADEMY PRESS 2101 Constitution Avenue, N.W. Washington, DC 20418
NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The members of the committee responsible for the report were chosen for their special competences and with regard for appropriate balance.
This study was supported by Contract No. DAAD 19-99-L-0052 between the National Academy of Sciences and the Department of Defense. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the organizations or agencies that provided support for the project.
International Standard Book Number 0-309-07555-6
Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 2001090219
Additional copies of this report are available from National Academy Press , 2101 Constitution Avenue, N.W. , Lockbox 285, Washington, DC 20055 ; (800) 624-6242 or (202) 334-3313 (in the Washington metropolitan area); Internet, http://www.nap.edu
Copyright 2001 by the National Academy of Sciences . All rights reserved.
Printed in the United States of America
Page iii
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES
National Academy of Sciences
National Academy of Engineering
Institute of Medicine
National Research Council
The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Bruce M. Alberts is president of the National Academy of Sciences.
The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. William A. Wulf is president of the National Academy of Engineering.
The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Kenneth I. Shine is president of the Institute of Medicine.
The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy’s purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Bruce M. Alberts and Dr. William A. Wulf are chairman and vice chairman, respectively, of the National Research Council.
Page iv
COMMITTEE ON OPPORTUNITIES IN BIOTECHNOLOGY FOR FUTURE ARMY APPLICATIONS
MICHAEL R. LADISCH, NAE, chair, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana
ILHAN AKSAY, Princeton University, Princeton, New Jersey
ERIC BAER, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio
ROBERT R. BIRGE, University of Connecticut, Storrs
ROGER BRENT, Molecular Sciences Institute, Berkeley, California
SHEILA H. DEWITT, ArQule, Inc., Woburn, Massachusetts
MAURO FERRARI, Ohio State University, Columbus
CHRISTOPHER C. GREEN, General Motors, New Baltimore, Michigan
NILE F. HARTMAN, Photonic Sensor Systems, Inc., Atlanta, Georgia
PAUL E. LAIBINIS, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge
VERNE L. (LARRY) LYNN, Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (retired), Williamsburg, Virginia
M. ALLEN NORTHRUP, Cepheid, Inc., Sunnyvale, California
THOMAS C. RANSOHOFF, TranXenoGen, Inc., Shrewsbury, Massachusetts
DANIEL I.C. WANG, NAE, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge
JANET WESTPHELING, University of Georgia, Athens
KENSALL D. WISE, NAE, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor
Board on Army Science and Technology Liaison
KATHRYN V. LOGAN, Georgia Institute of Technology (retired), Roswell, Georgia
JOHN H. MOXLEY III, IOM, Korn/Ferry International, Los Angeles, California
MILLARD F. ROSE, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Huntsville, Alabama
CLARENCE G. THORNTON, Army Research Laboratory (retired), Colts Neck, New Jersey
National Materials Advisory Board Liaison
MIKE JAFFE, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, Piscataway
National Research Council Staff
ROBERT J. LOVE, Study Director
JIM MYSKA, Research Associate
GWEN ROBY, Senior Project Assistant
LINDA VOSS, Technical Consultant
Page v
BOARD ON ARMY SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
WILLIAM H. FORSTER, chair, Northrop Grumman Corporation, Baltimore, Maryland
RICHARD A. CONWAY, Union Carbide Corporation (retired), Charleston, West Virginia
GILBERT F. DECKER, Walt Disney Imagineering, Glendale, California
PATRICK F. FLYNN, NAE, Cummins Engine Company, Columbus, Indiana
HENRY J. HATCH, NAE, U.S. Army (retired), Oakton, Virginia
EDWARD J. HAUG, University of Iowa, Iowa City
ROBERT J. HEASTON, Guidance and Control Information Analysis Center (retired), Chicago, Illinois
GERALD R. IAFRATE, University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, Indiana
MIRIAM E. JOHN, Sandia National Laboratories, Livermore, California
DONALD R. KEITH, Cypress International, Alexandria, Virginia
KATHRYN V. LOGAN, Georgia Institute of Technology (retired), Roswell, Georgia
JOHN E. MILLER, Oracle Corporation, Reston, Virginia
JOHN H. MOXLEY III, IOM, Korn/Ferry International, Los Angeles, California
STEWART D. PERSONICK, Drexel University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
MILLARD F. ROSE, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Huntsville, Alabama
GEORGE T. SINGLEY, Hicks & Associates, McLean, Virginia
CLARENCE G. THORNTON, Army Research Laboratory (retired), Colts Neck, New Jersey
JOHN D. VENABLES, Martin Marietta Laboratory (retired), Towson, Maryland
ALLEN C. WARD, Ward Synthesis, Inc., Ypsilanti, Michigan
Staff
BRUCE A. BRAUN, Director
MICHAEL A. CLARKE, Associate Director
BILL CAMPBELL, Administrative Coordinator
CHRIS JONES, Financial Associate
REBECCA LUCCHESE, Senior Project Assistant
DEANNA SPARGER, Senior Project Assistant
Page vii
Preface
This report has been an extremely challenging endeavor. First, the topic of biotechnology is so dynamic that new developments are being announced almost daily. Consider that the impact of sequencing the human genome in 2000 has already translated into accelerated programs for development of new medicines and of other useful molecules. I believe, as many others do, that biotechnology will continue to develop at a rate that has not been seen since the birth of microprocessor-based personal computers. It was against this backdrop of a rapidly changing science, and an even more rapidly changing translation of science into technology, that the committee addressed the issues in this report.
Second, the scope of biotechnology is expanding so fast that scientists and engineers have difficulty reconciling their perceptions of what is and isn’t included; in fact, new and important subdisciplines with linkages to future technologies, such as proteomics, have just emerged in the last few years. A third challenge has been to prepare a report that could satisfy and be understood by an audience composed of both generalists and specialists, as well as by those in the Army who must make the hard decisions on S&T priorities among all technology areas.
The committee examined the basis of new technologies and the probabilities that they could have a future impact on Army capabilities. I believe the report also provides a valuable snapshot of the nature of biotechnology and how its many facets can affect the Army. Although biotechnology is a “moving target,” actions can be taken to help track the progression of new biological concepts that will lead to products with the highest potential for Army use.
I wish to thank the committee members for their excellent efforts and the many hours they spent gathering, analyzing, summarizing, and interpreting information, debating the messages that this information contained, and assembling an excellent product.
I would also like to thank Mr. Robert Love, study director, for assembling the committee’s findings into this report. His ability to coordinate the genesis and writing of this multidisciplinary report was essential to the success of this project. His patience, dedicated effort, insights, and disciplined approach are much appreciated.
Michael R. Ladisch, chair
Committee on Opportunities in Biotechnology for Future Army Applications
Page ix
Acknowledgments
This report has been reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise, in accordance with procedures approved by the NRC’s Report Review Committee. The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the institution in making its published report as sound as possible and to ensure that the report meets institutional standards for objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the study charge. The review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the deliberative process. We wish to thank the following individuals for their review of this report:
Claudia Benack, ENSCO, Inc.
Corale L. Brierley, NAE, Brierley Consultancy LLC
R. John Collier, Harvard Medical School
Joseph M. Davie, IOM, Biogen, Inc. (retired)
Gary S. Fischman, University of Illinois at Chicago
David K. Gifford, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
John Halver, NAS, U.S. Army (retired)
Larry Lehowicz, U.S. Army (retired), Quantum Research International
Matthew S. Meselson, NAS, IOM, Harvard University
Mehmet Sarikaya, University of Washington
Phillip A. Sharp, NAS, IOM, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Joseph F. Soukup, Science Applications International Corporation
Although the reviewers listed above have provided many constructive comments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the conclusions or recommendations nor did they see the final draft of the report before its release. The review of this report was overseen by John C. Bailar, IOM, University of Chicago. Appointed by the National Research Council, he was responsible for making certain that an independent examination of this report was carried out in accordance with institutional procedures and that all review comments were carefully considered. Responsibility for the final content of this report rests entirely with the authoring committee and the institution.
Page xi
Contents
|
Page xii
Contents
|
Page xiii
Contents
|
Page xv
Figures, Tables, and Boxes
FIGURES
|
TABLES
|
Page xvi
BOXES
|