Document 15EqOmoR6RwwXbdb9LV0rjMej

* .z - . * * m * * I ,* *m*m > * * ** * *T. " ; *\'t / t '* IVAN SABOURIN.Q.C. *t**e MMtac m December 20th, 1957. I Dr. Daniel Braun, Industrial Hygiene Fcuxvdaiioo at America Zac., Mellon Institute. 44ww F tftti Arenur, ' prrrsBUKG u, pa. t* Dear Dan;- r:zsr lor Publication *' I mm enclosing a --If-explanatory letter Xfttm Smith and %f orafar, ihU e coaHrmattne at-mmt : nation. of even date, * you ___ efcaagu (tf 70s, ot orase, agree *h them^^e(a Jhe cnedenjgftai. X ha-re epofceo vfch Dr.DrtaJt*c who tael here i&Sum with yes afltr car uieihoM end ha told me 8 eaua Ifcdy the i he pniaaixfteri i* March or AprfL- B.-%-rre9r^.`S>- 3r Try erfch Koa in the conyrYtatafctaee he ie mendleg; parcfTepd at hU V( ex . Iomns-Manyii.).]-: (iournRATioN nVKN'rV TWII HAS I HUM'II'TII viukiit Nr.iv YOKh I'.i. N V l.wi i vivi. 1 irvi< r.s December 30, 1?57 hr. Ivan Sabourin St. Johns Quebec bear Ivan: ; i. ` . n * . -r. ` * Be: ' * I.H.F. Survey *t . ' Hugh Jackson and I have rovieved the condensation of the survey which you sent us. We have noted deletion of all references to the association of asbestosis and lung cancer in this condensation. While we believe that this in formation is of great scientific value, we can understand the desire of the Q.A.K.A. to emphasize the exposure of the asbestos miner and not the cases of ' asbestosis. We also are in agreement with the deletion of the reference to - smoking and lung cancer. . t It must be recognized, however, that this report will be subjected to ( criticism when publisnea because all other authors today correlate lung cancer and cases of asbestosis. If ve are to restrict this condensation to asbestoe miners, greater emphasis should be placed on the choice of words .used in defin ing the cohort. The fact that all members of the cohort had 5 or hore years of exposure to asbestos should be reiterated. , * Following' are comments on certain paragraphs of the condensation. Page 9 \ We believe the first sentence in paragraph 2 should read "Perhaps no one has written so extensively - - - Page iU In the third sentence of paragraph 2 the definition of cohort should be expanded to emphasize tnat non-exposed personnel were not included in the sample. Ttus might be done by adding a sentence similar to the following: "Office and other non-uxposed personnel, regardless of length' of employment were not included in tut conort". Page Id ' - To further emphasize the exposure aspect of the miners the second sentence of paragraph 2 might read, "All workers with more than 5 years of ex posure were placed in one of three categories". It might be advisable to add another sentence at the end of this para graph, "Ao previously noted workers with no exposure were not included in tho data". 00012128 ?3 In Use fuurtn autitcucc reforimec in irado to "tho yjjll level of signifi- carlco,,. This phraaa va.i explained dourly end thoroughly on lhiges 23 to 25 in Die 6ocllon on St.aliBt.icnl Methods of tho original uurvoy. IkiCtuiue this whole suction wae dolcted in tho condensation wo fuel it. wight bu advisable to explain by foot note the metming of "tho 95`f level of ;iigni f ienneo" . * Vo feel that the fifth sentence slight be made stronger by the following change. "However, having found juat 12 eases, wo are not above thic level, and thereforo the hypothesis Umt iiolieotoo icIjk.tu do nut Iihvu :< higher mortal ity frosi lunv cancer than dooa tins general jiojm I ntiun c;inmJt'"ho rojocts-d". laf:e hi - . . The Cable in the center of tho jut$e chows a rate of 2?1 in tho k5 - $k *ge group. In the original survey Lhio rute war. 27* . Ki/itr ltd In the last sentence of the first paragraph wo uoulo' like to suggest the oubstitution of the word "undcrlnkou" for tho word " commas ionod11. In the second sentence of paragraph 3 vc would like to suggest that the elnsaunte of tho cohort definition be repea tod, "A cohort v*s defined as a group of aabesto^vtiners hovin-r at least 5 years of exposure in the iivibtry and who wore in tho industry during lyjO. Only those work ora who met these criteria were in cluded in tho otudy". v' HapeJjP ' *' In the last scntcnco of paragfJph 1 wo would like to WJpgcot the dele tion of the pliraso "uni eh have been explained in some dotall" since such explanation was deleted in the condensation. ` . Tgis publication should form, tho basin for future' nurveyn and reports, pr. bra on should l>c to olabllr.h the frienavorlt of import i n,; for Iloctorn Uiifi,p:r find Cartier no tlul each year tho status of'every uh mliur of the original cohort could he reported to tho Industrial lly|'1t-n<.< Ki.uji'tu t.1 on ,'iritl the font) null i; r.tmiy he Jmalyxtd by thrlr iMpi-rt:;. We cannot cn'pb'iuluL* Uuu point too otrongly buci.iisu nnwncrc* Sri tJie llturiituru today la timri.* reported a ntudy which i:i so valuable and vnlch .uppj-tMi'n.vbuo Wits if-ignttudo, _ ` We agreu witti Doctors tlirttu:* .inti Uraun Ui-tl o pnrtain number oT wurl.cra proUhly have soar* n.ibwstollc f.ibrv>sir. which cm mot U\ diagnuaod by x-r.iy. Un fur tunaLely, vii cannot Lake lung )*lwp;ilus un-all workers sutd we havo no other w;ma oI nuiking a diagnosis before thoro Arc 7,-my chan/jra. 'Therefore the annual study of all o.'.jwmkI ashustun wurkcra bucoisuo Jncr(M.*iln;;iy Jjipfirt.wt. ,. . 'We foci that fir. IJraun and his staff nru to he r-ougriitnlalbii heartily fur this yory valuable* cuntributwu to our medic.il kimwlcdeo. We trust that thoir c/furts wiLl bn rewarded in 111- near. future by the jniblicy-Citm of this work in a rfcogmaed Journal. . * . ` 5Into/ jify, PRODUCED JMr83 00012129E/wr.-Ul W. fUiiu,, H.U. - ,,,