Here's a 1981 interview with a man who explains the case of Dr. Martin J. Cline, a recombinant DNA researcher at the University of California, Los Angeles, who violated regulations of the National Institutes of Health (NIH). 

One regulation violated says that if you’re using human subjects in a study, you must get pre-approval from a local hospital committee before moving forward with the study; the committee will determine whether the benefits of the study outweigh the risks. 

Another regulation violated says that if you’re doing recombinant DNA research on human subjects, you must get pre-approval from another local hospital committee, i.e. the Institutional Bio-Safety Committee, to determine whether the planned experiment is OK under the NIH guidelines. 

In July of 1980, in both Israel and Italy, it was found that Dr. Cline violated both regulations noted above by not getting the proper approvals in advance. 

The interviewer asks what the disciplinary action against Dr. Cline means to Dr. Kline individually as well as for the field generally. 

The interviewee says that the disciplinary action will slow Cline up, requiring him to get approvals that other scientists aren't required to get. Also, Cline's funding might get cut off. He says that a national advisory committee will determine in September (of 1981) whether Cline's funding should be revoked.

Interviewer asks if the disciplinary action against Dr. Cline is throwing monkey wrench into DNA research. 

The man says “no.” Thinks that it will be a warning to other investigators that, when they do human-subject research or recombinant-DNA research, they are expected to follow the appropriate federal rules and, if they don’t, there will be disciplinary action. Says he believes that most scientists are following the federal rules and that the rules do allow for a lot of good research to move forward. He also doesn’t think that scientists will have trouble getting approval for their projects so long as they go through the proper procedures. 

Interviewee says that Cline’s reaction to the disciplinary action taken against him is that he, i.e. Cline, believes he made a mistake and that he was wrong. 

The interviewer thanks the interviewee for the interview. They talk about what will become of the interview. Interviewer says the interview will become a part of the story they are working on, presumably a story on Cline’s case.