Only two of the estimated 100 doctors present spoke out in favor of the guidelines.

So in response, the faculty council watered down the proposal to its final form. That satisfied most faculty and administrators at the Med School, who noted that the school, who noted that the school was requiring financial disclosure without unduly hampering research.

Baruj Benacerraf, committee member and president of the Harvard-affiliated Dana Farber Cancer Institute, says, "In the form in which it is now present, [the guidelines] should not stifle research at all, and it should not impede the development of technology."

Although the guidelines' effectiveness depend largely on the performance of the to-be-named committee, and although the new committee's powers and composition are still uncertain, Med School faculty were optimistic that the committee would gradually develop a sense for what activities should be prohibited.

"One of the things that has to come out of this is over the next year or two, we'll start learning [what activities should be allowed]," said Lehman Professor of Microbiology and Molecular Genetics Bernard N. Fields, who spoke out against the original document because of its negative tone.

"I think [the new guidelines] will accomplish the goals of the policy in general, and at the same time, policy will permit certain activities to go forward, which will provide for the public good, but which would have otherwise not been allowed by a blanket provision," says Andrus Professor of Genetics Philip Leder, a committee member.

Criticism of Guidelines

But not everyone is so content with the end result. Jaron Bourke '88, director of the Ralph Nader-sponsored group Harvard Watch, has sent letters to President Derek C. Bok and the heads of the Harvard hospitals criticizing the guidelines for their flexibility. He says that even under the new guidelines, Harvard's researchers are still not accountable to the public.

"At stake is the dwindling pool of independent scientists and doctors," Bourke says. "Shall we entrust it to Harvard's anonymous and directionless committees? The prospect is Reaganesque."

In all likelihood, the new guidelines will seriously affect a small minority of professors who currently already have strong ties to industry, according to Assistant Professor of Health Policy David Blumenthal.

"[The new policy] may deter some people who have had consulting relationships predating their research relationship," Blumenthal said.

But Barbara J. McNeil, who chaired the conflict-of interest committee, says she does not expect the policy to hinder new research at all.