Part: 12         Session: 145678910111213141516171819202122         Page 318319320321322323324325326327328329330331332333334335336337338339340341342343344345346347348349350351352353354355356357358359360361362363364365366367368 of 999

... If I had not had terrible, terrible problems all along the way, with the people for it, the people against it, the press, everything was just -- well, you saw this article in HARPERS MAGAZINE. It's ludicrous. That I was going to destroy science, you know.

That's HARPERS of what date?

Here, November, '71.

Read that paragraph.

This is an article in HARPERS MAGAZINE of 1971, November, by a woman called Lucy Eisenberg. She says, “They're extremely worried about the fate of the NIH and convinced that taking the NCI out of the NIH will not only result in less funding for what is left but may even result in dismantling of the entire organization. If this happens it will be a calamity. The NIH has nourished the development of medical research here and abroad. It has been a tremendously successful organization. If the NIH dies because of Mary Lasker's compulsion to do something special about cancer, both science and medicine may suffer.”

Have you had any repercussions to the fact that this has now become the law of the land?

Well, you know, I really don't. Every once in a while somebody that I meet has noticed that there is some legislation passed on cancer and they associate me with it and so on. But I don't have great lot of talk about it.