Document 0L4EZ3k6Vg9p7v32w94kEwg3b

24 October 1968 Mr. D. G. Fowler, Lead Industries Association Inc. , 292 Madison Avenue, New York, N.Y. 10017, U.S. A. Dear Don, It seems that trouble is brewing for the meeting of the Permanent Commission on Occupational Health which is being organised by Zielhuis and which will take place on November 28 and 29. As you probably know, the topic under discussion is "Acceptable Criteria for Exposure to Inorganic Lead". According to reports from Ted King and Mike Williams, Zielhuis's paper tends to show that haemoglobin levels are depressed at blood lead figures well belpw 80 ug% 1 What he has done apparently is a statistical analysis of results reported in the literature and from a number of centres and of course the reliability of some of them may be questionable. (Mike Williams' recent results have been excluded, after consideration). King however, after initial scepticism of Zielhuis1 thesis, has re-examined the data that he has for Vauxhall workers during the time he was at the plant and it appears that there is a measure of support for Zielhuis. I have asked Ted to send on to you a photostat of Zielhuis' paper so that you can see it at first hand and be able to recommend what, if anything, can be done. Clearly it would be nice to have a whole mass of evidence of blood lead haemoglobin relationships which would contradict Zielhuis' claims and you may be able to-lay hands on this from Kettering, or perhaps the auto companies. In any case I would appreciate having your advice as soon as possible and, if you can make it, by next Friday, November 1, when I shall probably be meeting Dennis, Ted and Mike for a discussion. I don't know whether anybody from the States is attending Zielhuis' meeting. Ted thought that Stockinger might have been invited. Perhaps you could have a word with him. I have had an invitation to go as a kind of observer -reporter, since I could clearly not make a useful contribution out of my own Mr. D. G. Fowler Page 2 going on at first hand and I hope that Ross will agree. The danger to me seems to lie in two directions (a) that WHO might interpret the results in such a way as to recommend a TL.V for blood lead at 60 ug% and (b) that the reports presented at the meeting may provide the Pattersons of this world with a lot of ammunition. I shall look forward to your reply. Yours sincerelv. Morgan H. Davies mhd / pm 0009022