Dr. Roderich „Array

Through: .r. Hurry 1. Layer,Jr.

Pornica 1. Eddy, Ph.D.

Publication of manuscripts

November 23, 1960

cd you will find a copy of a motorendum sent to me by Dr. Mudel, alsa a copy of an abstract sent to Er. Tripp through Dr. Jandel and you ad returned so me today with Dr. Sandel's comments and his disapproval.

to

Natt nuded a meeting in Stodithola tho years ago and I know that there ople who are interested in the CC, test and judging from the ciscassion t mosting there would be interest in a test to replace it. „ccording 2.2 dol'a memoranium dazed november M, 1950, it is too late to have ur raidy for the Federation,eetings.

CLustion da: That shall I do about reporting the information this I have on the subject: Shall I spend my time writing another paper that will not get to the Editorial Committee? I had two zanuscripts returned to ne yesterday that I had rushed to complete bafore Dr. Szudel left so that they could be considered by the Fûitorial Committee. Ong paper is on the induction of tumora da barsters by an extract of key kidney tissue culture colls, & subject plate should concern an orguization with the responsibility for looding after the purity of bîfîopied products. The other paper is on e Lell for potency of adenovirus vaccines. The manufacturers are interested in tim mutter and I told some of them then they were hers on November 16 th that I would send a copy of the paper to then as soon as it was approved by the Editorial Committes.

I had six days notice that papers or abstracts would not be considered for publication while Dr. Smadol is away. I understand that he will not return until ist in lecomber which with the holiday coming up will coɑn a delay of approximately one-twelfth of a year.

2.1. & werd id wheat. Vacalno 1 and X were identical,

Colic 1-3 and Y were identical.

Lo soon as they brought this, I ran in the ame

to L tuso I had worked "y". When they know dot dia, i
vaccinos, eng ned 406 and where they shan't kno

what I thougat was a more rollistic CCA veled.

Now there isn't much Cifference between this CC

una these when you are considering that there are two

o involved. But that is the problem, and we wat

ntially able to solve it because we had a cool.

сен

Whey went back. They adjusted their Kletts.

Not

Regar

not adjusted their Kletes previously. This was one of one Cople that were reading about 2.2 sonometers, if my memory is, caaucet. They had never changed their Kletts after the worknop as they had agreed to.

They went bạch and they changed thell Meru, bale, a as this time, and from that point on thet man.facturer been putting out vaccines that have been consiste.tly

A with respect to the reference vaccine.

DR. EDDY: Could I ask one question here.

If it was very vident there that in spite of the
(lay vere misrepresenting their results, in other words,

77-615 O 72-41

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE

PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE
NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH

Date: 8 May 1970

Reply to

Atin of: LVR NO.: 70-05-08-03

Subject: Dr. J. Anthony Morris--recommendation that his employment in the Division be terminated

1. Since coming to work for the Division in January 1964, I
have been aware of the fact that Dr. J. Anthony Morris, who
was at that time Chief, Section on Respiratory Viruses (SRV),
LVR, was a constant administrative problem not only within the
Laboratory, but also to the Division in general.
It was
dreadful to observe the changes occurring in my predecessor,
Dr. Alexis Shelokov, because of the problems created by Dr.
Morris' actions. When I was being considered for my present
position, the possibility of inheriting the problem was even
more dreadful. As you are aware, I did inherit the problem.
I strongly feel that something must be done to solve what has
been considered for some time to be an unsolvable problem. I
have seriously reviewed Dr. Morris' past performance. This,
together with an evaluation of his current activities, prompts
me to recommend that Dr. Morris' employment in the Division be
terminated. The purpose of this memorandum is to present the
reasons upon which my recommendation is based. Statements of
specific charges are numbered, underlined and followed by a
description of the specific or related circumstances bearing
upon each charge and by appropriate supporting documents and
evidence.

2. First. Dr. Morris was derelict in the exercise of his duties and responsibilites as Chief, Section on Respiratory Viruses (SRV), when he certified as potent certain influenza vaccine lots which actually failed the potency tests performed in his laboratory.

3. This fact can be substantiated by evidence recently
obtained upon reviewing Dr. Morris' laboratory records of
mouse potency tests on influenza virus vaccines performed in
1965 and 1966. A description of the events eventually leading
to my assuming the responsibility of testing the potency of
influenza vaccines would provide a degree of perspective which
would explain how and why the Division had been ignorant of
these facts until now.

3

Page

we

4. It has been an undeniable fact that Dr. Morris' performance while he was Chief, SRV was a most intolerable situation. There was little or no communication between Dr. Morris and Dr. Shelokov (who was, at that time, Chief, LVR) concerning the conduct of the control work with respect to influenza vaccine. What little communication did exist provided Chief, LVR with almost no information concerning LVR's responsibility to test for influenza vaccine potency. (This situation which existed at the time can be corroborated by Dr. Shelokov at any time.) The relationship between Drs. Shelokov and Morris deteriorated many times. I can remember several occasions when Dr. Shelokov would decide to give Dr. Morris "another chance", but, as it turned out, Dr. Shelokov regretted his decision each time. In January 196 Dr. Shelokov asked me to assume the responsibility to test influenza vaccine potency. Up until that time we had had almost no experience working with influenza viruses. However, we learned rapidly, and, within several months, we realized that the Division was so far behind in its capability to test adequately influenza vaccine potency we wondered if we could ever catch up. When we started to perform the required mouse potency tests on influenza vaccines, were unable to find a single lot of vaccine which passed. We thought that this was probably due to our inexperience. However, we soon discovered that it was not, and, the fact of the matter was that Dr. Morris had been certifying as potent certain influenza vaccine lots which actually failed the potency tests performed in his laboratory. We performed tests on many vaccines at that time and we soon realized that manufacturers were submitting vaccine which contained less than 40% of the required antigen content as measured by the CCA (chicken cell agglutination) test. In fact, several manufacturers' vaccines contained 10-20% of the required antigen content. In my opinion, manufacturers, over the years, had been submitting vaccines containing less and less antigen because they realized that they could get away with it. 5. We have come a long way in the past 2-3 years and the manufacturers have responded very well to our efforts in insuring that influenza vaccines contain the required antigen content. We have no way of knowing how long Dr. Morris had been certifying low potency influenza vaccine. Attachment A summarizes the results of Dr. Morris' mouse potency test results on vaccine lots which were released by the Division on the basis of Dr. Morris' reports. Recently (December 1969), Mr. L. J. Reber, Assistant to the Chief for Control Affairs, of my office reviewed and

analyzed those influenza vaccine potency tests performed by Dr. Morris during 1965 and 1966. The results of this analysis (Attachment A) show that in 1965 of 11 vaccines which were tested and certified as potent 2 had actually failed the required potency tests; in 1966 of the 11 vaccine lots which were tested and certified as potent 6 had failed the required mouse potency tests. In my opinion, to have certified as potent vaccine lots which failed the required potency tests was dishonest and a betrayal of a trust to provide the public with potent vaccines-one of the triad of the DBS mission. I also feel strongly that, for no other reason, this betrayal of a public trust ought to be sufficient reason to justify termination of Dr. Morris' employment in the Division. However, I will continue with some other reasons.

6. Second. Dr. Morris repeatedly ignores and exhibits disdain for administrative duties and responsibilities; in addition he has repeatedly disobeyed orders and was insubordinate to his supervisors.

7. This has been common knowledge (substantiated by evidence submitted in Attachment B) and has been not only my experience, but also that of my predecessor (Dr. Shelokov), Dr. Leon Jacobs (previous Scientific Director, DBS), and Dr. Roderick Murray (Director, DBS). Because of Dr. Morris' unsatisfactory performance he has not been receiving his within-grade step pay increases since August 1966, and Dr. Morris has not taken official exception to these decisions. Reasons for the decisions to withhold his within-grade increases have been stated in previous memoranda (Attachment C).

8. There are many examples of Dr. Morris' refusal to comply with certain rules and regulations and to execute administrative responsibilities. Attachment D contains documents which bear witness that on many occasions Dr. Morris submitted manuscripts for publication without prior approval and administrative clearance. Concerning his most recent infraction, Dr. Morris had an article published which has never been approved and cleared by the appropriate officials. Dr. Morris has compounded his error by stating that he did get approval. This we know is not true, and, although he has been officially requested to supply the formal approval papers, he has not done so. He is unable to do so because no approval was ever given.

9. Recently, I have had to reassign Dr. Morris' last technical assistant because of his (Dr. Morris') failure (or should I say refusal?) to insure that his assistant comply with the rules and