When may research be stopped?

The prohibition of research with recombinant DNA must rely upon some argument that both establishes a principle, applicable to research in any sphere, identifying kinds of defect or hazard that are intolerable, and shows that recombinant DNA research is intolerably defective or hazardous in the ways specified by that principle. No such argument succeeds. Of arguments proposed to defend prohibition it may be fairly said either that the major premise (the principle of prohibition) is false, or when sound principles are put forward, that the minor premise (specifying recombinant DNA research as defective or hazardous in the ways called for) is far from established. There is no valid practical syllogism, having true premises, whose conclusion is that research with recombinant DNA should be stopped.