Document 1EX4GjxoKB7MMYn1yYzxXxYj

To D r . Kehoe From W . Peaslee U N IVERSITY O F CIN CIN N ATI ( IN TER D E PAR TM EN TAL; CO R R E SP O N D E N CE SH E E T ) ,Date July 29 1966 On July 25, Mr Britton's office (Pfaudler Company) called; It seems that he never received the message that you had phoned him on.July 14. I informed his secretary that you would be back in the office about August 16. Rochester, New York 14603- Dear Mr. Britton? In my expectation of your telephone call, in return for mine, I failed to report to you, in writing, on the results of ray inter view with representatives of the .Federal Food and Drug -Adminis-> tration. However, as the comments in ray communication enclosing an expense account indicated, the verdict was unfavorable. The position taken by the group o; 1 four men'with whom X spoke, as set forth, for all practical purposes by the present lav/ and the regulations, was that food materials, including beverages, processed industrially, should not have lead added to them in any quantity, and that any such additives were condemned, as adultrtions, by the present law. From the aspect of present industrial practice, the use of stainless steel in processing equipment has been found to be satisfactory in every respect, and therefore there is no present necessity for the use of other tvpes of vessels. I was in no position to sirgue the case on either point. The desirability, in principle, and in practical fact, of avoiding the contamination of food materials with lead, is incontestible. Obviously, if the degree of contamination is too small to be detected, there would be no violation of the l$w,. (unless the -idmi ni strat or s of the law, on the basis of indirect evidence, were to weigh against a source of contamination) As to the virtues and vices of stainless steel as a general material for processing equipment, I have had ho such experience as would enable -me to dissent from the stata nts made to me. If j Xt 0019357 N19940 your people have relevant knowledge of these matters. It might he worth our while to get together at some time and explore the possibilities. You will know whether this is desirable, in all likelihood, and I shall await further word from you. 1 shall be back in uiy office on the 16th or 17th of August and will remain in Cincinnati for about two weeks before taking off for a European trio. ' Very truly yours, R A K :liiii Robert A. Kehoe, M.D. Profess or' Sioefitus of Occupational Medicine j I K b 0019958